Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 13:27:47 -0500
From: chris hyser <>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <>
Cc: Daniel Micay <>,
        Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) <>,
        Mahesh Bandewar <>,
        LKML <>, Netdev <>,
        Kernel-hardening <>,
        Linux API <>,
        Kees Cook <>,
        "Eric W . Biederman" <>,
        Eric Dumazet <>, David Miller <>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH resend 2/2] userns: control
 capabilities of some user namespaces

On 11/09/2017 01:05 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> Would the existing capability bounding set not suffice for that?
> The 'permanent' bounding set turns out to not be a good fit for
> the problem being discussed in this thread, but please feel free
> to start a new thread if you want to discuss your use case.

Sure. I will formulate something for a new thread. What seems to be 
asked for here is a way to globally patch the capability sets of a 
entire process subtree.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.