> > > A kernel panic should only be the result of a catastrophic system
> > > failure that the kernel cannot continue from.
> >
> > Unauthorised access _is_ a catastrophe.
>
> I agree.
>
> However, the kernel only enforces the privileges. It doesn't set them.
That is not true. Hotplugging changes it. By assigning new devices
to existing device nodes, the kernel _does_ hand out permissions.
Therefore the kernel has to ensure that all permissions are revoked
on the old previously used device node. It cannot depend on a script,
because scripts lack the reliability.
> > > Failing to set permissions on a device doesn't seem like something that
> > > would qualify for a panic.
> >
> > Failure to set them is not a security problem.
> > Abstractly speaking setting permissions/ownership is handing out
> > priviledges. If that operation fails the system will not function
> > properly, but security is not compromised.
> >
> > Failure to reset permissions is quite another thing. It opens up the
> > possibility that access to other devices is accidentally granted.
>
> You're making the assumption that privileges don't change.
How so? Could you elaborate ?
> I seem to recall a discussion like this in the past, but why can't we
> just change the permissions dynamically as the user logs in and logs out
> of the console?
That we can do. But it has its own set of problems.
> The only problem I can think of would be managing multiple users on a
> console.
Yes.
Regards
Oliver
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
