"Serge E. Hallyn" writes:
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 04:55:29PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> "Serge E. Hallyn" writes:
>>
>> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 02:19:13PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> >> "Serge E. Hallyn" writes:
>> >>
>> >> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 07:34:49PM -0600, Eric
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 04:55:29PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> "Serge E. Hallyn" writes:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 02:19:13PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> "Serge E. Hallyn" writes:
> >>
> >> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 07:34:49PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> >> Miklos
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 05:11:53PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> "Serge E. Hallyn" writes:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 08:44:26PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:09 PM Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 07:34:49PM -0600, Eric W.
"Serge E. Hallyn" writes:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 08:44:26PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 6:09 PM Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 07:34:49PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> > > Miklos Szeredi writes:
>> > >
>> > > > if
"Serge E. Hallyn" writes:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 02:19:13PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> "Serge E. Hallyn" writes:
>>
>> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 07:34:49PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> >> Miklos Szeredi writes:
>> >>
>> >> > If a capability is stored on disk in v2 format
Miklos Szeredi writes:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 9:24 PM Eric W. Biederman
> wrote:
>
>>
>> From our previous discussions I would also argue it would be good
>> if there was a bypass that skipped all conversions if the reader
>> and the filesystem are in the same user namespace.
>>
>
>
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 9:24 PM Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> From our previous discussions I would also argue it would be good
> if there was a bypass that skipped all conversions if the reader
> and the filesystem are in the same user namespace.
>
That's however just an optimization (AFAICS)
"Serge E. Hallyn" writes:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 07:34:49PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Miklos Szeredi writes:
>>
>> > If a capability is stored on disk in v2 format cap_inode_getsecurity() will
>> > currently return in v2 format unconditionally.
>> >
>> > This is wrong: v2 cap
On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 07:34:49PM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Miklos Szeredi writes:
>
> > If a capability is stored on disk in v2 format cap_inode_getsecurity() will
> > currently return in v2 format unconditionally.
> >
> > This is wrong: v2 cap should be equivalent to a v3 cap with
Hi Miklos,
I love your patch! Perhaps something to improve:
[auto build test WARNING on security/next-testing]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in
https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch]
Hi Miklos,
I love your patch! Perhaps something to improve:
[auto build test WARNING on security/next-testing]
[also build test WARNING on linux/master linus/master v5.11-rc4 next-20210120]
[If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note.
And when submitting patch, we
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 2:39 AM Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Miklos Szeredi writes:
>
> > If a capability is stored on disk in v2 format cap_inode_getsecurity() will
> > currently return in v2 format unconditionally.
> >
> > This is wrong: v2 cap should be equivalent to a v3 cap with zero
Miklos Szeredi writes:
> If a capability is stored on disk in v2 format cap_inode_getsecurity() will
> currently return in v2 format unconditionally.
>
> This is wrong: v2 cap should be equivalent to a v3 cap with zero rootid,
> and so the same conversions performed on it.
>
> If the rootid
13 matches
Mail list logo
