On Saturday 01 November 2008 03:14:05 Dax Kelson wrote: > On Sat, 2008-11-01 at 01:09 -0600, Dax Kelson wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 15:02 -0400, Steve Grubb wrote: > > > We tried to support this in F-10 by having a test run with ping. We > > > figured that is a simple well defined app that could be used as a test > > > subject. We opened bz 455713 to document the change over. Turns out > > > that people compile their own kernels and do not necessarily turn this > > > on. So, what do we do in that case? > > > > I thought more about this. > > > > How about a check in rc.sysinit to see if the kernel supports > > capabilities? > > > > If the check fails it could do either or both of the following: > > > > 1. Display and log nasty warning message > > 2. Run the command: chmod u+s `cat /etc/posixcapbinaries` I don't like self modifying systems. It can generate audit events and cause aide to complain. > > Doing 2. would be the "friendly" thing to give the user a non-broken > > system. It does make it a bit more complicated because you'd want some > > logic that if they booted back to a kernel with posix capabilities you > > stripped the suid bits. Also, rpm verity will complain. > > Another idea. > > Leave all the binaries with SUID bit set, but have the /etc/fstab have > 'nosuid' on all the filesystems. The file system capabilities inside the kernel are treated as if they were suid apps. IOW, nosuid also disables file system capabilities. -Steve -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
