Quoting Florian Weimer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > * Janak Desai: > > > With unshare, namespace setup can be done using PAM session > > management functions without patching individual commands. > > I don't think it's a good idea to use security-critical code well
Note that this patch is not removing the CAP_SYS_ADMIN requirement, just allowing the operation to happen outside of clone(). Unlike domain transitions in selinux, which should be tied to exec() so as to tie them to known code, I don't see what clone() would provide in terms of safety which we are losing. > without its original specification. Clearly the current situation > sucks, but this is mainly a lack of PAM functionality, IMHO. I'm not sure this is to do with PAM functionality, rather than just its design. Is there a way of "fixing" pam so that we don't need unshare()? thanks, -serge - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
