Preface: I was siting down about to send this off to the PSARC
alias, in response to the libdlpi one page, when I thought that
this discussion is perhaps better served by being elsewhere as
it really isn't to do with that case, directly, at all, unless
someone thinks it should be brought up in PSARC discussion anyway...

Subject: Re: PSARC/2006/436 Public DLPI Library
A side issue that concerns me with making libdlpi available
is the association between using it and having the correct
privilege (NET_RAWACCESS.)

In this specific instance, if I'm developing a product for
Solaris that uses libdlpi, what would lead me to knowing
about security privileges and then use them, if I'm coming
from a traditional unix background where it is "you must be
root to do everything" ?  Why would I care about them?  So
I can install my program into the least privilege framework
correcrtly.  Sure if I read about security privileges I'll
find out how to do that, but what will lead me there?
It's like going fishing using line without a hook or bait.
The key to remember here is that if you're been programming
for Linux or even Solaris, all you know is that the program
must run as root (for snoop/tcpdump, etc) and this will, by
and large, continue to work, meaning you never need to
discover the bigger world that Solaris has to offer.

Strictly speaking it could be seen as inappropriate for
this library to document the requirement of NET_RAWACCESS
itself, but I think it would be of benefit if there was
some linkage through the man pages between those for libdlpi
and those for security privileges, if only to further advertise
this capability and hopefully see more people make use of it.

That said, I'm unsure if there isn't a bigger task here,
for the developers of security privileges (not libdlpi),
to consider how/where to make privileges more visile to
developers.  Just looking at this case, of raw access to
network devices, there currently doesn't appear to be any
mention on it in snoop's man page, either and snoop's
entry into exec_attr looks like it is waiting for a CR...

Darren


Reply via email to