From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752905Ab0CSVxP (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:53:15 -0400 Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:52446 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752732Ab0CSVxO (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:53:14 -0400 Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 14:53:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20100319.145336.226782717.davem@davemloft.net> To: andi@firstfloor.org Cc: cl@linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Add PGM protocol support to the IP stack From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <87tysccjrn.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> References: <87tysccjrn.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.3 on Emacs 23.1 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Andi Kleen Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2010 18:18:36 +0100 > Christoph Lameter writes: >> >> I know about the openpgm implementation. Openpbm does this at the user >> level and requires linking to a library. It is essentially a communication >> protocol done in user space. It has privilege issues because it has to >> create PGM packets via a raw socket. > > That seems like a poor reason alone to put something into the kernel > Perhaps you rather need some way to have unpriviledged raw sockets? > > The classical way to do this is to start suid root, only open > the socket and then drop privileges. I completely agree. We should be able to make a way for unprivileged users to use RAW sockets in some limited capacity, for cases like this. But I also don't consider what openpbm has to do right now to be all that much of a restriction. You need privileges to add the protocol to the kernel, you need privileges to run the userspace variant, there is no real difference.