Hi Patrick, + Marcel and Johan
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 6:22 PM, Patrick Ohly <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 2014-07-10 at 16:09 +0200, [email protected] > wrote: >> I've just created a bug explaining this and proposing to link each >> CAPI call to a bluetooth daemon that could handle the multi-user >> policy. >> https://bugs.tizen.org/jira/browse/TC-1411 >> >> But I thought that Tizen has to track BlueZ upstream. Do you mean that >> BlueZ will handle multi-user soon ? > > That's what I am trying to find out. Luiz thought that it could, and > GENIVI was certainly interested in such a solution. I think before > implementing a Tizen-specific solution, at least investigating upstream > options is worthwhile. Before doing any solution for Tizen specifically I believe we should discuss the use cases with the community, there seems to be a lack of proper policy in some areas that we could perhaps solve using per user storage e.g. provided by the agent but this very likely will conflict with Tizen Bluetooth Service if that is not per user let alone the whole design seems to be circumventing a proper D-Bus policy so if Bluetoothd start to do policy based on the sender the Tizen Bluetooth Service would mask every sender because it acts as a proxy. IMO the very problem seems to be a lack of a proper security policy, BlueZ (oFono, connman, and neard) can support policies per method calls (afaik only policykit is supported so far) so perhaps we can extend that to whatever Tizen support. > -- > Best Regards, Patrick Ohly > > The content of this message is my personal opinion only and although > I am an employee of Intel, the statements I make here in no way > represent Intel's position on the issue, nor am I authorized to speak > on behalf of Intel on this matter. > > > _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
