Messages in this thread | | | From | "Albert D. Cahalan" <> | Subject | Re: Capabilities done right [diff against 2.3.1] | Date | Sun, 16 May 1999 03:34:46 -0400 (EDT) |
| |
Linus Torvalds writes: > On Sun, 16 May 1999, Albert D. Cahalan wrote:
>> You want to allow shellscripts with special powers?!?!? > > I may want to _strip_ shellscripts of power.
I suppose you intend to turn normal user abilities into default capabilities. (the ability to write to a writable file...)
I think that has the same problem, but nevermind.
It is also dangerous to add default capabilities because apps may drop unknown capabilities, causing failure at some critical point.
> I may want to give special power to certain Javascripts (assuming I'd ever > trust the java engine itself). I do _not_ consider it acceptable to give > all powers to the java interpreter in general, but I _do_ consider it > acceptable to give special capabilities to certain scripts.
When the interpreter and script both have capabilities marked...?
> The ELF notes way doesn't allow that.
You give capabilities to your trusted interpreter. It handles the issue according to whatever policy is needed.
> Do you start to see a pattern here now? It's not about ELF. It's about > everything ELSE. It's about doing something right, and not getting stuck > with a bad decision forever.
You only get stuck with the existance of the mechanism, which isn't too bad. The mechanism may be needed anyway for non-native filesystems.
Nothing prevents the creation of an alternate system that overrides the ELF header. (so there is no need to even look at the ELF notes in that case)
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |