Re: PROBLEM: A Capability LSM Module serious bug

[Serge E. Hallyn]

> I think patch to capability.c maybe a better way to fix this bug. Because 
> dummy.c is a simple superuser mechanism, capability should be not visible 
> to it. And capability modules may be extended to file system so as to 

The main question is do we declare cap_effective to belong solely to
capability.c, or do we want capability.c to trust previous LSM's
computations of those values?  So, even with the current case, if we
insmod, rmmod, then re-insmod capability, do we want to revoke all
previous cap_* computations?

It seems reasonable for it "belong" to capability.c (and I've heard of
noone else wanting to use it).  I just don't think we've explicitly
declared this to be the case.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/