Re: [06/07] [PATCH] SCSI tape security: require CAP_ADMIN for SG_IO etc.

On Gwe, 2005-04-29 at 05:20, Greg KH wrote:
> > Ok thats the bit I needed to know
> 
> So, do you still object to this patch being accepted?

Switched to CAP_SYS_RAWIO I don't. Its the wrong answer long term I
suspect but its definitely a good answer for now.

Alan

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [06/07] [PATCH] SCSI tape security: require CAP_ADMIN for SG_IO etc.
    • From: Greg KH <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [00/07] -stable review
    • From: Greg KH <[email protected]>
  • [06/07] [PATCH] SCSI tape security: require CAP_ADMIN for SG_IO etc.
    • From: Greg KH <[email protected]>
  • Re: [06/07] [PATCH] SCSI tape security: require CAP_ADMIN for SG_IO etc.
    • From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
  • Re: [06/07] [PATCH] SCSI tape security: require CAP_ADMIN for SG_IO etc.
    • From: Kai Makisara <[email protected]>
  • Re: [06/07] [PATCH] SCSI tape security: require CAP_ADMIN for SG_IO etc.
    • From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
  • Re: [06/07] [PATCH] SCSI tape security: require CAP_ADMIN for SG_IO etc.
    • From: Greg KH <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Mercurial 0.4b vs git patchbomb benchmark
• Next by Date: Spurious disk change detections interferes with disk access
• Previous by thread: Re: [06/07] [PATCH] SCSI tape security: require CAP_ADMIN for SG_IO etc.
• Next by thread: Re: [06/07] [PATCH] SCSI tape security: require CAP_ADMIN for SG_IO etc.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]