Re: what if to not to give firefox sys_admin capability with apparmor?

2020-02-14 Thread Jed Davis
On Monday, February 10, 2020 at 11:14:26 AM UTC-7, gcpas...@gmail.com wrote: > IIRC CAP_SYS_ADMIN is needed to install seccomp-bpf filters. We don't need capabilities for seccomp-bpf. We do need capabilities for anything namespace-related: chroot()ing to a deleted directory to revoke filesystem

Re: what if to not to give firefox sys_admin capability with apparmor?

2020-02-14 Thread gcpascutto
On Monday, 10 February 2020 15:22:38 UTC+1, dinar qurbanov wrote: > i have enabled firefox apparmor profile in linux mint, and one of log > messages about denied requests is sys_admin capability. firefox works > normally at its surface behavior, for me. how much bad things may > happen because it

what if to not to give firefox sys_admin capability with apparmor?

2020-02-10 Thread dinar qurbanov
i have enabled firefox apparmor profile in linux mint, and one of log messages about denied requests is sys_admin capability. firefox works normally at its surface behavior, for me. how much bad things may happen because it has not this capability? i have found some information: