Re: caps in elf, next itteration (the hack get's bigger)

Magnus Ahltorp (map@stacken.kth.se)
14 Apr 1999 02:25:03 +0200

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Richard B. Johnson: "Re: Why does arp on 2.2.5 return "SIOCSARP: Operation not supported by device"?"
Previous message: bwoodard@cisco.com: "SMP vs. Specialized chipsets WAS: Re: I have information/driver ..."
In reply to: Joseph Malicki: "Re: caps in elf, next itteration (the hack get's bigger)"
Next in thread: Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH: "Re: caps in elf, next itteration (the hack get's bigger)"

> Since the main argument against capability metadata was nfs, and
> immutable isn't exported over NFS, why not just make up a new Ext2
> attribute for "check capabilities"?

Why should capabilities be used over NFS? Wasn't capabilities supposed
to make things more secure? Then, where does NFS fit into that
picture?

/Magnus

-
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/

Next message: Richard B. Johnson: "Re: Why does arp on 2.2.5 return "SIOCSARP: Operation not supported by device"?"
Previous message: bwoodard@cisco.com: "SMP vs. Specialized chipsets WAS: Re: I have information/driver ..."
In reply to: Joseph Malicki: "Re: caps in elf, next itteration (the hack get's bigger)"
Next in thread: Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH: "Re: caps in elf, next itteration (the hack get's bigger)"