Re: [PATCH 3/4] security: capabilities patch (version 0.4.4), part3/4: introduce new capabilities

[Jan Engelhardt]

>> To expand on this a little, some of the capabilities you are looking to 
>> add are of very little if any use without being able to specify objects. 
>> For example, CAP_REG_OPEN is whether the process can open any file 
>> instead of specific ones. How many applications open no files whatsoever 
>> in practice? Even if there are some as soon as they change and need to 
>> open a file they'll need this capability and will be able to open any. 
>> CAP_REG_WRITE has the same problem. For a description of why 
>> CAP_REG_EXEC is meaningless see the digsig thread on the LSM list from 
>> earlier this year.
>
>CAP_REG_OPEN and CAP_REG_EXEC might be useful only for demonstration
>purposes, but I've *often* wished I could run a program without

You cannot reasonable run a program without CAP_REG_OPEN, because 
ld.so, libc.so and libdl.so all may load a ton of required files 
underneath you.

$ strace -e open ls 2>&1 >/dev/null | grep open | wc -l
36



Jan Engelhardt
-- 
-
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/