On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Serge E. Hallyn <serge@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Quoting Eric W. Biederman (ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx): >> single sandbox. I am not at all certain that the capabilities is the >> proper place to limit code reachability. > > Right, I keep having this gut feeling that there is another way we > should be doing that. Maybe based on ksplice or perf, or maybe more > based on subsystems. And I hope someone pursues that. But I can't put > my finger on it, and meanwhile the capability checks obviously *are* in > fact gates... > Well, I don't mind if there is a better solution available. The proposed solution is not adding too much or complex code and using a bit and a sysctl and will be sitting dormant. When we have complete solution, this addition should not be a burden to maintain because of it's non-invasive footprint. I will push the next version of the patch-set that implements Serge's finding. Thanks, --mahesh.. [PS: I'll be soon traveling again and moving to an area where connectivity will be scarce / unreliable. So please expect lot more delays in my responses.] > -serge -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
