Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 04:44:32 +0200
> Frank Benkstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Frank Benkstein wrote:
>>> I wonder why there are different permissions needed for VT_PROCESS
>>> (access to the current virtual console) and VT_LOCKSWITCH
>>> (CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG).
>> To
Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 04:44:32 +0200
Frank Benkstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frank Benkstein wrote:
I wonder why there are different permissions needed for VT_PROCESS
(access to the current virtual console) and VT_LOCKSWITCH
(CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG).
To be more direct:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 04:44:32 +0200
Frank Benkstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Frank Benkstein wrote:
> > I wonder why there are different permissions needed for VT_PROCESS
> > (access to the current virtual console) and VT_LOCKSWITCH
> > (CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG).
>
> To be more direct:
>
>
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 00:22:38 +0200 Frank Benkstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I wonder why there are different permissions needed for VT_PROCESS
>> (access to the current virtual console) and VT_LOCKSWITCH
>> (CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG).
>>
> Perhaps the issue with
Andrew Morton wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 00:22:38 +0200 Frank Benkstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wonder why there are different permissions needed for VT_PROCESS
(access to the current virtual console) and VT_LOCKSWITCH
(CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG).
Perhaps the issue with VT_LOCKSWITCH is that
On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 04:44:32 +0200
Frank Benkstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frank Benkstein wrote:
I wonder why there are different permissions needed for VT_PROCESS
(access to the current virtual console) and VT_LOCKSWITCH
(CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG).
To be more direct:
require
On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 00:22:38 +0200 Frank Benkstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I wonder why there are different permissions needed for VT_PROCESS
> (access to the current virtual console) and VT_LOCKSWITCH
> (CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG).
>
> The first one lets the calling process decide if console
Frank Benkstein wrote:
> I wonder why there are different permissions needed for VT_PROCESS
> (access to the current virtual console) and VT_LOCKSWITCH
> (CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG).
To be more direct:
require CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG for VT_SETMODE as its essentially the same as
VT_LOCKSWITCH and said
Hi,
I wonder why there are different permissions needed for VT_PROCESS
(access to the current virtual console) and VT_LOCKSWITCH
(CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG).
The first one lets the calling process decide if console switching is
allowed, the second one simply disables it. If a program wants to
forbid
Hi,
I wonder why there are different permissions needed for VT_PROCESS
(access to the current virtual console) and VT_LOCKSWITCH
(CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG).
The first one lets the calling process decide if console switching is
allowed, the second one simply disables it. If a program wants to
forbid
Frank Benkstein wrote:
I wonder why there are different permissions needed for VT_PROCESS
(access to the current virtual console) and VT_LOCKSWITCH
(CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG).
To be more direct:
require CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG for VT_SETMODE as its essentially the same as
VT_LOCKSWITCH and said
On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 00:22:38 +0200 Frank Benkstein [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wonder why there are different permissions needed for VT_PROCESS
(access to the current virtual console) and VT_LOCKSWITCH
(CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG).
The first one lets the calling process decide if console switching
12 matches
Mail list logo