Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965025AbWIRMKl (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Sep 2006 08:10:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964986AbWIRMKl (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Sep 2006 08:10:41 -0400 Received: from stanford.columbia.tresys.com ([209.60.7.66]:51294 "EHLO twoface.columbia.tresys.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965010AbWIRMKk (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Sep 2006 08:10:40 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] security: capabilities patch (version 0.4.4), part 3/4: introduce new capabilities From: Joshua Brindle To: Pavel Machek Cc: David Madore , Alan Cox , Linux Kernel mailing-list , LSM mailing-list In-Reply-To: <20060918120424.GA5370@elf.ucw.cz> References: <20060910133759.GA12086@clipper.ens.fr> <20060910134257.GC12086@clipper.ens.fr> <1157905393.23085.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <450451DB.5040104@gentoo.org> <20060917181422.GC2225@elf.ucw.cz> <450DB274.1010404@gentoo.org> <20060917211602.GA6215@clipper.ens.fr> <1158579966.8680.24.camel@twoface.columbia.tresys.com> <20060918120424.GA5370@elf.ucw.cz> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 08:12:16 -0400 Message-Id: <1158581536.8680.26.camel@twoface.columbia.tresys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.3 (2.6.3-1.fc5.5) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1317 Lines: 30 On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 14:04 +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > > > The benefits of this are so minuscule and the cost is so high if you are > > > > ever to use it that it simply won't happen.. > > > > > > I'm withdrawing that patch anyway, in favor of a LSM-style approach, > > > the "cuppabilities" module (cf. the patch I posted a couple of hours > > > ago with that word in the title, and I'll be posting a new version in > > > a day or so, or cf. > > http://www.madore.org/~david/linux/cuppabilities/ > > > >). In this case, the relative cost will be lower since the > > > security_ops->inode_permission() hook is called no matter what. > > > > > > > You misunderstand. I don't mean the performance cost is high, I mean the > > cost of an application to actually be able to run without open() (what I > > was saying before, static built, no glibc, no conf files, no name > > lookups, etc). I never see this being used in the real world because of > > the extreme limitations. > > It is already being used. See config_seccomp. Where are the users? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/