From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760821Ab0FQWbZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:31:25 -0400 Received: from earthlight.etchedpixels.co.uk ([81.2.110.250]:38667 "EHLO www.etchedpixels.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753123Ab0FQWbX (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Jun 2010 18:31:23 -0400 Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 23:34:06 +0100 From: Alan Cox To: Kees Cook Cc: Randy Dunlap , James Morris , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Jiri Kosina , Dave Young , Martin Schwidefsky , Roland McGrath , Oleg Nesterov , "H. Peter Anvin" , David Howells , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , "Eric W. Biederman" , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Smalley , Daniel J Walsh , linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] ptrace: allow restriction of ptrace scope Message-ID: <20100617233406.1de4e132@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <20100617222504.GD24749@outflux.net> References: <20100616221833.GM24749@outflux.net> <20100617000120.13071be8@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20100616232230.GP24749@outflux.net> <20100617170453.GV24749@outflux.net> <20100617215349.2fac02f5@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20100617140630.c6ced27a.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <20100617211616.GA24749@outflux.net> <20100617231859.04fcdbde@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> <20100617222504.GD24749@outflux.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.18.9; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) 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 > I don't mind putting them in commoncap at all. I would just like people > to agree on what they disagree about. :) I don't believe they belong in commoncap, but as something which can sit on top of commoncap and then be dropped into by the security modules that makes total sense. (Really thats just the stacking debate and how to dodge it ;)) Ie you'd have optionally: LSMs optionally: cap_switches required: commoncap