> On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 15:34:44 -0700 Andrew Morgan <morgan@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > | On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 08:10:26 -0700 Andrew Morgan <morgan@kernel.org>
> > wrote:
> > |
> > |> Nacked-by: Andrew G. Morgan <morgan@kernel.org>
> > |>
> > |> In a configuration in which you are not using capabilities, what is the
> > |> "keep capabilities" operation supposed to do? Lie to you?
> > |>
> > |>
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10748
> > |
> > | I totally agree with comment 11 there. Quite a number of people have
> > already
> > | hit this and more surely will. How can we help them (and hence us)?
> >
> > What do people think about comment #8 from Stephen Smalley?:
> >
> > The dummy module is generally in the untenable position of having to lie
> > to userspace or break the existing capability-related system call
> > interface. It should just go away, and make capability the default
> > module (w/ stubs for the rest of the LSM hooks as with dummy). Then
> > CONFIG_SECURITY=n will yield the same result as CONFIG_SECURITY=y w/o
> > any further options.
>
> (removed pgp crap, undid top-posting. Your emails are very hard to reply to)
>
> It's a fine comment, but I am not knowledgeable enough in this area to
> say whether it's a desirable thing to do for 2.6.26.
>
> I fear that nothing will happen, and we'll end up wasting a lot of
> peoples' time sending hey-why-did-my-dhcp-break reports.
