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

Andreas Barth (aba@muenchen.pro-bahn.org)
15 Apr 1999 08:27:28 GMT

On 15 Apr 1999 05:13:09 +0200, David L. Parsley (lkml account) <kparse@salem.k12.va.us> wrote:
> But let me use the named(8) example again, because I've thought it over
> again and find that my original thinking was wrong. (why am I picking on
> named(8) you ask? because that's how my box was rooted. that's why I'm
> on a holy mission to get capabilities implemented)

But you don't need capabilities for named at all. Named could be
secured if there's a port-device-map which describes who (uid)
may use which port. Named would get a port, mail another and so
on.

There was a patch for this around (called sockfs). (But
capabilities are a good thing and should be implemented.
Only named doesn't need it.)

Andi

-- 
      Andreas Barth  <aba@muenchen.pro-bahn.org>  PGP-Key auf Anforderung
======PGP-Fingerabdruck  DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F  3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C======
      Nomic kann nur der gewinnen, der nicht mitspielt.        Utz Pflock


-
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/