validity test in cap_set_proc(), POSIX.1e 25.4.15.2

[Casey Schaufler]

Robert Watson wrote:

> Hmm.  How is this not addressed through use of the inheritable set?
> ...

Well, that's what I get for not reading my own spec before posting.

In general, the POSIX group always took the position that we
didn't care how the interfaces were used, just how they were
specified. Thus, a check which declares a capset invalid
just because it's stoopid would not be included because each of
us believed that one or more of us where planning to do stoopid
implementations. The intention for cap_valid() was to prevent
applications and kernels from crashing, nothing more. It was
not intended to perform any policy checking.

-- 

Casey Schaufler				Manager, Trust Technology, SGI
casey at sgi.com				voice: 650.933.1634
casey_p at pager.sgi.com			Pager: 888.220.0607

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at cyrus.watson.org
with "unsubscribe posix1e" in the body of the message