From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752839AbbBWPpS (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Feb 2015 10:45:18 -0500 Received: from mail-lb0-f176.google.com ([209.85.217.176]:42492 "EHLO mail-lb0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752761AbbBWPpK (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Feb 2015 10:45:10 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: From: Andy Lutomirski Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 07:44:48 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] capabilities: Ambient capability set V1 To: Christoph Lameter Cc: Serge Hallyn , Aaron Jones , "Ted Ts'o" , LSM List , Andrew Morton , "Andrew G. Morgan" , Mimi Zohar , Austin S Hemmelgarn , Markku Savela , Jarkko Sakkinen , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Linux API , Michael Kerrisk , Jonathan Corbet Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 6:58 AM, Christoph Lameter wrote: > Ok 4.0-rc1 is out and this patch has been sitting here for a couple of > weeks without comment after an intensive discussion about the RFCs. > > Since there were no objections: Is there any chance to get this into -next > somehow? > At the very least, I think it needs to define and implement what happens when a cap is added to ambient and then dropped from permitted. We also may need LSM_UNSAFE_something to clear the ambient set to avoid a major security issue. I'd like to discuss (in the hallway if nothing else) at LSF/MM with whatever other interested people will be there. --Andy -- Andy Lutomirski AMA Capital Management, LLC