Re: PROBLEM: A Capability LSM Module serious bug

[Chris Wright]

* Serge E. Hallyn (hallyn@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> 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?

This is a common issue with the opaque blobs as well.

> 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.

Unfortunately, it's currently used by kernel proper.  So we need a
generic solution.

thanks,
-chris
-- 
Linux Security Modules     http://lsm.immunix.org     http://lsm.bkbits.net
-
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/