Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 18 Sep 2006 09:02:17 -0700 (PDT) | From | Casey Schaufler <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/4] security: capabilities patch (version 0.4.4), part 3/4: introduce new capabilities |
| |
--- Joshua Brindle <method@gentoo.org> wrote:
> And that is just practical stuff, there are still > problems with > embedding policy into binaries all over the system > in an entirely > non-analyzable way, and this extends to all > capabilities, not just the > open() one.
Your assertion that directly associating the capabilities with the binary cannot be analysed is demonstrably incorrect, reference Common Criteria validation reports CCEVS-VR-02-0019 and CCEVS-VR-02-0020. The first system I took through evaluation (that is, independent 3rd party analysis) stored security attributes in a file while the second and third systems attached the attributes directly (XFS). The 1st evaluation required 5 years, the 2nd 1 year. It is possible that I just got a lot smarter with age, but I ascribe a significant amount of the improvement to the direct association of the attributes to the file.
Casey Schaufler casey@schaufler-ca.com - 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/
| |