Re: patch to make Linux capabilities into something useful (v 0.3.1)

[Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>]

Hi!

> > Well, I could imagine that a paranoid sysadmin might
> > want some users'
> > processes to run without this or that capability
> > (perhaps
> > CAP_REG_PTRACE or some other yet-to-be-defined
> > capability).  This
> > doesn't mean that they shouldn't be able to run a
> > game which runs sgid
> > in order to write the score file.
> 
> A likely scenario might be the 3rd party program
> that you really are sure about trusting. You
> give it a capability set that has nothing in it
> (hence runs without capability regardless of
> the capabilities of the parent). That's part
> of the rationale behind the POSIX scheme, that
> some programs you just don't want to ever run
> privileged, period. But POSIX only deals with
> going "above" base, which is why I like the
> notion of your "underprivileged" scheme as a
> seperate addition.

Well, in kernel above-priviledge and below-priviledge makes sense to
be handled by same code. You can always create interface you prefer in
glibc...
						Pavel

-- 
Thanks for all the (sleeping) penguins.