also sprach Jurij Smakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.10.0258 +0200]:
> In order for the capability stuff to function the capability.ko
> module should be loaded. The situation you describe indeed occurs
> when capability.ko is not loaded into the kernel. So I would say
> that this is lcap bug, as
On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, martin f krafft wrote:
Note: I am not filing this as a bug for reasons of responsible
disclosure. Maybe I am just being too paranoid. Let me know if
I should file the bug, or just forward my mail...
Hi Martin,
In order for the capability stuff to function the capability.ko
also sprach Humberto Massa Guimarães <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.09.1718
+0200]:
> Just curious, what does bit 8 (SYS_SETPCAP) means? Why is it off?
> Does it have anything to do with your bug?
On all the machines I've tested, this bit was always off right after
boot. SETPCAP deals with process
Just curious, what does bit 8 (SYS_SETPCAP) means? Why is it off? Does it have
anything to do with your bug?
--
[]s,
Massa
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
also sprach martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.06.09.1106 +0200]:
> Note: I am not filing this as a bug for reasons of responsible
> disclosure. Maybe I am just being too paranoid. Let me know if
> I should file the bug, or just forward my mail...
Ha! I am a dork. So I guess it's now full-d
Note: I am not filing this as a bug for reasons of responsible
disclosure. Maybe I am just being too paranoid. Let me know if
I should file the bug, or just forward my mail...
Package: kernel-source-2.6.11
Version: 2.6.11-5
Severity: grave
Tags: security
Note that the flags are correctly manipula
6 matches
Mail list logo
