Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Capabilities | From | (Jonathan Corbet) | Date | Fri, 25 Feb 2000 14:50:38 -0700 |
| |
[Central capability database]
> Oooohhhh... Nice concept... So, if it were to implemented on > Linux would we have to bind to dentries pre-init, then? > Or do we bind to inodes post-init?
It would have to be post-init, I would think. The capabilities database would have to live on disk somewhere, and would presumably need to be loaded into the kernel with some sort of helper program.
I can't be accused, however, of having spent too much time thinking through how an implementation would actually be done...
> Also, how would we handle overmount conditions, such as:
Presumably the database, as stored in the kernel, would tie to both the device and inode numbers. It clearly can't work with just the file name alone. Some sort of direct attachment to a (permanently) in-core inode or dentry structure probably makes the most sense - it's where you would need to find it when the program is executed. But, again, I've not thought about how you would actually implement it.
jon
Jonathan Corbet, Eklektix, Inc. corbet@eklektix.com
- 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/
| |