From Sebastien.Roy@sun.com Thu Jan 3 09:51:32 2008 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m03HpVBX029765 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 09:51:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m03HpSEw008574 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 17:51:30 GMT Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JU20001DXLTM700@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Thu, 03 Jan 2008 09:51:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.98.31]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JU200F7XXLREFB0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Thu, 03 Jan 2008 09:51:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from fe-amer-10.sun.com ([192.18.109.80]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id m03HpRm9023029 for ; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:51:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JU200N01XJO4500@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM) for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Thu, 03 Jan 2008 10:51:27 -0700 (MST) Received: from [192.168.1.3] ([72.93.210.146]) by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JU200AWXXLO2S40@mail-amer.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Thu, 03 Jan 2008 10:51:25 -0700 (MST) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 12:51:24 -0500 From: Sebastien Roy Subject: 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates Sender: Sebastien.Roy@sun.com To: PSARC-ext@sun.com Cc: clearview-discuss Message-id: <477D209C.9070604@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071203) Status: RO Content-Length: 7822 I'm sponsoring this fasttrack on behalf of Cathy Zhou and the Clearview team. The timer expires on January 10th 2008. 1. Summary This case comprises pre-integration updates to Clearview Nemo Unification and Vanity Naming (a.k.a. UV), currently described in the following PSARC cases: 2006/499 Clearview Nemo unification and vanity naming 2007/527 Addendum for Clearview Vanity Naming and Nemo Unification An updated UV design document is included in the case materials. 2. Details 2.1 Removal of Data Fast-Path for Softmac In the design described in 2006/499, the softmac kernel module is responsible for representing "legacy" DLPI devices to the Nemo framework, and ensuring that data packets flow properly between DLPI streams above Nemo and the "legacy" drivers underneath. This called for a fast-path between upper DLPI streams and lower "legacy" drivers, implemented by having the softmac module open a stream to the underlying driver for each upper stream above Nemo, and linking these streams to bypass Nemo entirely. The fast-path is referred to as the "perstream" past-path in the design document. This fast-path has been removed in the final phases of development due to to its incompatibility with an upcoming project which is making major changes in the same area of the kernel. For the initial UV putback, data packets will flow through the Nemo framework as with any other Nemo driver. We are actively working with the other project on an alternate fastpath implementation that meets everyone's needs, and its architecture will be part of a future case. The result is that the following interfaces will _not_ be delivered by the UV putback as initially specified by the stated PSARC cases: * MAC_CAPAB_TX_LOOPBACK (2006/499, Project Private) * MAC_CAPAB_PUTNEXT_TX (2006/499, Project Private) * MAC_CAPAB_MDT (2006/499, Project Private) * MAC_CAPAB_PERSTREAM (2006/499, Project Private) * mac_perstream_open() and mac_perstream_close() (2006/499, Project Private) 2.2 MAC_CAPAB_LEGACY MAC Capability (Project Private) This capability replaces MAC_CAPAB_NOLINK_UPDATE defined in 2006/499, and provides additional information. The data for this capability is a pointer to the following structure: typedef struct mac_capab_legacy_s { dev_t ml_dev; uint32_t ml_unsup_note; } mac_capab_legacy_t; The ml_dev field is set to the dev_t of the underlying "legacy" device. This is used by the mac module to force the underlying device to attach when a MAC client calls mac_open(). The ml_unsup_note field is a bitfield of DLPI notifications. Certain "legacy" devices under softmac may not support the DLPI notifications needed for softmac to provide all MAC notifications to the Nemo framework. The softmac module fills in this field with the set of DLPI notifications that are not supported by the given softmac instance. 2.3 MAC_CAPAB_NO_ZCOPY The MAC_CAPAB_NOZCOPY MAC capability defined in 2006/499 is being renamed by this case to MAC_CAPAB_NO_ZCOPY to be consistent with other capability nomenclature. 2.4 Privileges for dlmgmtd The dlmgmtd daemon described in 2006/499 requires the following set of privileges: file_dac_write, file_chown_self, sys_mount, and sys_net_config. 2.5 MAXLINKNAMELEN The MAXLINKNAMELEN constant has been added to , and it defines the longest possible permitted datalink name (including the terminating NULL character.) Its stability level is Committed. Note that the existing DLPI_LINKNAME_MAX constant remains, but it only intended for use by libdlpi consumers, whereas MAXLINKNAMELEN is appropriate for more general use. 2.6 New mac_margin_update() MAC driver function 2007/527 described a m_margin field of mac_register_t for MAC drivers to specify a margin value. To dynamically update this value, this case adds the following Consolidation Private MAC driver function: boolean_t mac_margin_update(mac_handle_t, uint32_t); The second argument specifies the new margin value. If the margin cannot be changed to the specified value, B_FALSE is returned, otherwise B_TRUE is returned. B_FALSE would be returned, for example, if a MAC client has placed a constraint on the MAC's margin such that it cannot be increased to the specified value (see mac_margin_add() in section 2.7). 2.7 New Nemo MAC client functions In addition to the existing mac_open() function which allows MAC clients to open a specific MAC by MAC name, UV introduces the following functions to allow clients to open a MAC using different identifiers which may be available to MAC clients: int mac_open_by_linkid(datalink_id_t, mac_handle_t *); int mac_open_by_linkname(const char *, mac_handle_t *); mac_open_by_linkid() allows a client to open a MAC using the linkid of the link above the MAC, and mac_open_by_linkname() allows a client to open a MAC using the link name of the link above the MAC. Because the MAC margin size can dynamically change as described in 2.6, MAC clients also need a way to specify their constraints on the "margin" that drivers can provide (because proper operation MAC clients could depend on a specific margin size previously set by the driver.) To request that the MAC not change its margin size to be less than a specific value, MAC clients call the following function: int mac_margin_add(mac_handle_t, uint32_t *, boolean_t); If the third argument is set to B_TRUE, then the caller requires that the margin remain at or above the current value, and the second argument is set to the current value. If B_FALSE, the second argument specifies a specific value that the caller requires to be the minimum margin. To remove a constraint on margin size, MAC clients call the following function: int mac_margin_remove(mac_handle_t, uint32_t); The last argument specifies the value to be removed as a constraint. As with the rest of the Nemo MAC client interfaces, all of these interfaces are private to the Nemo framework (Project Private). 2.8 Change to dls_create() and dls_destroy() The Nemo Project Private dls_create() and dls_destroy() functions have been renamed dls_devnet_create() and dls_devnet_destroy() respectively. See the UV design document for details. 2.9 linkid management API changes The Project Private linkid management API described in 2006/499 defined a function called dladm_rename_conf(). It has been determined that this function is not needed, and it will not be included. Additional minor changes have been made to this API, specifically to the following functions: dladm_status_t dladm_get_conf_field(dladm_conf_t, const char *, void *, size_t); dladm_status_t dladm_set_conf_field(dladm_conf_t, const char *, dladm_datatype_t, const void *); The "dladm_datatype_t *" argument was removed from dladm_get_conf_field(), and the last argument of dladm_set_conf_field() was changed from "void *" to "const void *". 2.10 dladm parseable output The format of parseable output of dladm show-* subcommands is currently not consistent (different subcommands have a different output formats.) A preferred output format is currently used by show-wifi, scan-wifi, show-secobj, and show-linkprop. In order to bring uniformity across all show-* parseable output, this case makes the other show-* subcommands' parseable output conform to that format. It is: ="" [="" ...] Every value is explicitly quoted to better support values with embedded space characters, and preceded by a = identifier string. From Sebastien.Roy@sun.com Thu Jan 3 10:42:50 2008 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m03IgnW1001875 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 10:42:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m03Igihl028175 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 18:42:48 GMT Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JU200201ZZ9UN00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Thu, 03 Jan 2008 10:42:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from brmea-mail-4.sun.com ([192.18.98.36]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JU200F7MZZ8EKD0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Thu, 03 Jan 2008 10:42:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from fe-amer-10.sun.com ([192.18.109.80]) by brmea-mail-4.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id m03IgiWc020620 for ; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 18:42:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JU200A01ZHNJU00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM) for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Thu, 03 Jan 2008 11:42:44 -0700 (MST) Received: from [192.168.1.3] ([72.93.210.146]) by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JU2000IRZZ7O120@mail-amer.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Thu, 03 Jan 2008 11:42:43 -0700 (MST) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 13:42:43 -0500 From: Sebastien Roy Subject: Re: 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates In-reply-to: <477D209C.9070604@sun.com> Sender: Sebastien.Roy@sun.com To: Sebastien Roy Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss Message-id: <477D2CA3.2030803@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <477D209C.9070604@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071203) Status: RO Content-Length: 876 Sebastien Roy wrote: > 2.1 Removal of Data Fast-Path for Softmac > ... > This fast-path has been removed in the final phases of development due > to to its incompatibility with an upcoming project which is making > major changes in the same area of the kernel. For the initial UV > putback, data packets will flow through the Nemo framework as with any > other Nemo driver. We are actively working with the other project on > an alternate fastpath implementation that meets everyone's needs, and > its architecture will be part of a future case. I received a private question regarding why the related project wasn't mentioned by name above. Since there's no substantial reason and others might also be curious, the project we're working with on the alternate fastpath is: 2006/357 Crossbow - Network Virtualization and Resource Management -Seb From gww@eng.sun.com Sat Jan 5 14:05:56 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m05M5t9D012406 for ; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 14:05:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m05M5XTP020066 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 06:05:54 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JU600J05YPSM200@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:05:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.32]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JU600ERZYPS7B90@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:05:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (marduk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.224]) by dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m05M5phk043365; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:05:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m05M50SF007612; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:05:00 -0800 (PST) Received: (from gww@localhost) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11/Submit) id m05M50uL007611; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:05:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 14:05:00 -0800 (PST) From: Gary Winiger Subject: Re: 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates To: PSARC-ext@sun.com, Sebastien.Roy@sun.com Cc: clearview-discuss@opensolaris.org Message-id: <200801052205.m05M50uL007611@marduk.eng.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 539 > An updated UV design document is included in the case materials. > 2.4 Privileges for dlmgmtd > > The dlmgmtd daemon described in 2006/499 requires the following set of > privileges: file_dac_write, file_chown_self, sys_mount, and > sys_net_config. In looking at the materials (though I didn't read too carefully), I saw dlmgmtd described, but not anything to do with privilege. Is this saying it now will run with no special access rights? For example as user noaccess and either no or just basic privileges? Gary.. From Cathy.Zhou@sun.com Sun Jan 6 22:52:43 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m076qgxE000921 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 22:52:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m076qWuO025299 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:52:41 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JU900203HRR2400@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Sun, 06 Jan 2008 22:52:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from sineb-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.19.7]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JU9001PVHRP9S00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Sun, 06 Jan 2008 22:52:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from fe-apac-06.sun.com (fe-apac-06.sun.com [192.18.19.177] (may be forged)) by sineb-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id m076qbn3002650 for ; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 06:52:37 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-apac.sun.com by mail-apac.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JU900L01HOSZK00@mail-apac.sun.com> (original mail from Cathy.Zhou@Sun.COM) for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:52:37 +0800 (SGT) Received: from [129.158.219.34] by mail-apac.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JU900CM0HRMUF8X@mail-apac.sun.com>; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:52:36 +0800 (SGT) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:52:33 +0800 From: Cathy Zhou Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates In-reply-to: <200801052205.m05M50uL007611@marduk.eng.sun.com> Sender: Cathy.Zhou@sun.com To: Gary Winiger Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, Sebastien.Roy@sun.com, clearview-discuss@opensolaris.org Message-id: <4781CC31.4040706@sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200801052205.m05M50uL007611@marduk.eng.sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.2 (X11/20060427) Status: RO Content-Length: 750 Gary Winiger wrote: >> An updated UV design document is included in the case materials. > >> 2.4 Privileges for dlmgmtd >> >> The dlmgmtd daemon described in 2006/499 requires the following set of >> privileges: file_dac_write, file_chown_self, sys_mount, and >> sys_net_config. > > In looking at the materials (though I didn't read too carefully), > I saw dlmgmtd described, but not anything to do with privilege. > Is this saying it now will run with no special access rights? > For example as user noaccess and either no or just basic privileges? > > Gary.. > Hi Gary, Sorry for not being clear. The dlmgmtd is still run by root, but once it starts, it drops all privileges and only keeps limited privileges. Thanks - Cathy From gww@eng.sun.com Mon Jan 7 13:05:15 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m07L5EYq018152 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 13:05:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m07L5Ci9014243 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 05:05:13 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUA00C0JL8MRQ00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Mon, 07 Jan 2008 13:05:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.32]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUA00C4FL8MP700@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Mon, 07 Jan 2008 13:05:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (marduk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.224]) by dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m07L58AM056223; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 13:05:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m07L4FFs009283; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 13:04:15 -0800 (PST) Received: (from gww@localhost) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11/Submit) id m07L4FrW009282; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 13:04:15 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 13:04:15 -0800 (PST) From: Gary Winiger Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates To: gww@eng.sun.com, Cathy.Zhou@sun.com Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com, Sebastien.Roy@sun.com, clearview-discuss@opensolaris.org Message-id: <200801072104.m07L4FrW009282@marduk.eng.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 883 > >> 2.4 Privileges for dlmgmtd > >> > >> The dlmgmtd daemon described in 2006/499 requires the following set of > >> privileges: file_dac_write, file_chown_self, sys_mount, and > >> sys_net_config. > > > > In looking at the materials (though I didn't read too carefully), > > I saw dlmgmtd described, but not anything to do with privilege. > > Is this saying it now will run with no special access rights? > > For example as user noaccess and either no or just basic privileges? > > > > Gary.. > > > Hi Gary, > > Sorry for not being clear. The dlmgmtd is still run by root, but once it starts, it drops > all privileges and only keeps limited privileges. Thanks. And you're aware that this still leaves dlmgmtd vulnerable to attack. Running with uid 0 and no effective or permitted privileges still means it has read access to all root owned files. Gary.. From Darren.Reed@sun.com Mon Jan 7 17:39:53 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m081dq5n026834 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 17:39:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m081dZrI024400 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 09:39:51 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUA00B03XYDL700@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Mon, 07 Jan 2008 18:39:49 -0700 (MST) Received: from sineb-mail-2.sun.com ([192.18.19.7]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUA00EY9XYBWDA0@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Mon, 07 Jan 2008 18:39:48 -0700 (MST) Received: from fe-apac-02.sun.com (fe-apac-02.sun.com [192.18.19.173] (may be forged)) by sineb-mail-2.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id m081dlIh008317 for ; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 01:39:47 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-apac.sun.com by mail-apac.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JUA00401WYAAW00@mail-apac.sun.com> (original mail from Darren.Reed@Sun.COM) for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 09:39:47 +0800 (SGT) Received: from [129.158.87.228] by mail-apac.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JUA00GPJXY92BX0@mail-apac.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 09:39:46 +0800 (SGT) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 12:39:19 +1100 From: Darren Reed Subject: Re: 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates In-reply-to: <477D209C.9070604@sun.com> Sender: Darren.Reed@sun.com To: Cathy Zhou Cc: PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <4782D447.80404@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <477D209C.9070604@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.13 (Windows/20070809) Status: RO Content-Length: 583 ... > 2.5 MAXLINKNAMELEN > > The MAXLINKNAMELEN constant has been added to , and it > defines the longest possible permitted datalink name (including the > terminating NULL character.) Its stability level is Committed. > > Note that the existing DLPI_LINKNAME_MAX constant remains, but it only > intended for use by libdlpi consumers, whereas MAXLINKNAMELEN is > appropriate for more general use. What relation does this have, if any, to the other #define'd constants such as LIFNAMSIZ, that are used by networking in, for example, struct lifreq? Darren From peter.memishian@sun.com Mon Jan 7 20:59:12 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m084xBlM003156 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:59:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m084x5uh027516; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:59:08 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUB00F0776GXS00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:59:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM ([129.158.219.186]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUB000BV76F88E0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:59:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m084wmsX014122; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 12:58:48 +0800 (CST) Received: (from meem@localhost) by dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id m084wkRs014119; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 12:58:46 +0800 (CST) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 12:58:46 +0800 From: Peter Memishian Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates In-reply-to: <200801072104.m07L4FrW009282@marduk.eng.sun.com> To: Gary Winiger Cc: Cathy.Zhou@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss@opensolaris.org, Sebastien.Roy@sun.com Reply-to: peter.memishian@sun.com Message-id: <18307.774.589706.729184@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 19) "Constant Variable" XEmacs Lucid Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200801072104.m07L4FrW009282@marduk.eng.sun.com> X-Authentication-warning: dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM: meem set sender to peter.memishian@sun.com using -f Status: RO Content-Length: 924 > Thanks. And you're aware that this still leaves dlmgmtd > vulnerable to attack. Running with uid 0 and no effective > or permitted privileges still means it has read access to > all root owned files. Yes, and based on a discussion Cathy and I had yesterday, we think it should be possible to change it to run as "dladm" instead ("noaccess" seems inappropriate since among other things, having the dlmgmtd door file owned by "noaccess" seems wrong). While we can try out using the "dladm" user, this change will have a subtle impact on accessing files that are either directly or indirectly accessed by dlmgmtd and its libraries, and thus it may take time to determine with certainty that it will work. So, in short, is the use of uid 0 with minimal privileges for a non-networked daemon a gating issue? Or could a change (if possible) from uid 0 to the dladm user be done as part of a future case? -- meem From peter.memishian@sun.com Mon Jan 7 21:17:16 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m085HFB4003306 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 21:17:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m085H6ff003673; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 13:17:10 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUB00G0N80JS900@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:17:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM ([129.158.219.186]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUB0009P80G88F0@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:17:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m085GuFV014155; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:16:56 +0800 (CST) Received: (from meem@localhost) by dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id m085Guni014152; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:16:56 +0800 (CST) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:16:56 +0800 From: Peter Memishian Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates In-reply-to: <4782D447.80404@Sun.COM> To: Darren Reed Cc: Cathy Zhou , PSARC-ext@sun.com Reply-to: peter.memishian@sun.com Message-id: <18307.1864.206538.71410@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 19) "Constant Variable" XEmacs Lucid Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <477D209C.9070604@sun.com> <4782D447.80404@Sun.COM> X-Authentication-warning: dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM: meem set sender to peter.memishian@sun.com using -f Status: RO Content-Length: 1197 > > 2.5 MAXLINKNAMELEN > > > > The MAXLINKNAMELEN constant has been added to , and it > > defines the longest possible permitted datalink name (including the > > terminating NULL character.) Its stability level is Committed. > > > > Note that the existing DLPI_LINKNAME_MAX constant remains, but it only > > intended for use by libdlpi consumers, whereas MAXLINKNAMELEN is > > appropriate for more general use. > > What relation does this have, if any, to the other #define'd > constants such as LIFNAMSIZ, that are used by networking > in, for example, struct lifreq? The LIFNAMSIZ constant represents the maximum length of an IP interface and should only be used for that purpose. The MAXLINKNAMELEN constant represents the maximum length of a datalink name and should only be used for that purpose. Since the IP physical interface name often comes from the datalink name, they are related, but they are neither the same namespace nor syntactically identical -- e.g., an IP interface may include a trailing logical interface identifier such as `:2', whereas a datalink name may not (further, `:' is an invalid character in a datalink name). -- meem From Darren.Reed@sun.com Mon Jan 7 21:54:24 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m085sNpV003867 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 21:54:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m085sHZI016604 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 13:54:22 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUB009019QJMY00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Mon, 07 Jan 2008 22:54:19 -0700 (MST) Received: from sineb-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.19.6]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUB0057T9QIYW30@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Mon, 07 Jan 2008 22:54:19 -0700 (MST) Received: from fe-apac-05.sun.com (fe-apac-05.sun.com [192.18.19.176] (may be forged)) by sineb-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id m085sHnD004482 for ; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 05:54:17 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-apac.sun.com by mail-apac.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JUB00J019PUG600@mail-apac.sun.com> (original mail from Darren.Reed@Sun.COM) for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:54:17 +0800 (SGT) Received: from [129.158.87.228] by mail-apac.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JUB00L2N9QGPBVV@mail-apac.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 13:54:17 +0800 (SGT) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 16:53:49 +1100 From: Darren Reed Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates In-reply-to: <18307.1864.206538.71410@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> Sender: Darren.Reed@sun.com To: Peter.Memishian@sun.com Cc: Cathy Zhou , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <47830FED.6030101@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <477D209C.9070604@sun.com> <4782D447.80404@Sun.COM> <18307.1864.206538.71410@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.13 (Windows/20070809) Status: RO Content-Length: 1888 Peter Memishian wrote: > > > 2.5 MAXLINKNAMELEN > > > > > > The MAXLINKNAMELEN constant has been added to , and it > > > defines the longest possible permitted datalink name (including the > > > terminating NULL character.) Its stability level is Committed. > > > > > > Note that the existing DLPI_LINKNAME_MAX constant remains, but it only > > > intended for use by libdlpi consumers, whereas MAXLINKNAMELEN is > > > appropriate for more general use. > > > > What relation does this have, if any, to the other #define'd > > constants such as LIFNAMSIZ, that are used by networking > > in, for example, struct lifreq? > > The LIFNAMSIZ constant represents the maximum length of an IP interface > and should only be used for that purpose. The MAXLINKNAMELEN constant > represents the maximum length of a datalink name and should only be used > for that purpose. Since the IP physical interface name often comes from > the datalink name, they are related, but they are neither the same > namespace nor syntactically identical -- e.g., an IP interface may include > a trailing logical interface identifier such as `:2', whereas a datalink > name may not (further, `:' is an invalid character in a datalink name). Yes...but... My concern here is simple: is there a hidden rule along the lines of MAXLINKNAMELEN must never be greater than LIFNAMSIZ? If there is, this should be stated somewhere. If there isn't then how do we deal with the following example... If I were to define MAXLINKNAMELEN to be twice that of LIFNAMSIZ (64 vs 32) and gave a datalink interface a name that was 50 chars long, how would it be plumbed and given an IP address? At least at this point in time I'm not aware of any way to plumb an interface using a name that is not [:] and a 50 character name won't fit in the lifreq.... Darren From Peter.Memishian@sun.com Mon Jan 7 22:03:58 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m0863vKu004017 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 22:03:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m0863FwO019578; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 14:03:54 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUB00C0NA6EZ400@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 23:03:50 -0700 (MST) Received: from dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM ([129.158.219.186]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUB005ZXA6CYW30@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 23:03:49 -0700 (MST) Received: from dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m0863eE7014233; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:03:40 +0800 (CST) Received: (from meem@localhost) by dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id m0863eJh014230; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:03:40 +0800 (CST) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:03:39 +0800 From: Peter Memishian Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates In-reply-to: <47830FED.6030101@Sun.COM> To: Darren Reed Cc: Peter.Memishian@sun.com, Cathy Zhou , PSARC-ext@sun.com Reply-to: Peter.Memishian@sun.com Message-id: <18307.4667.881528.872650@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 19) "Constant Variable" XEmacs Lucid Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <477D209C.9070604@sun.com> <4782D447.80404@Sun.COM> <18307.1864.206538.71410@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> <47830FED.6030101@Sun.COM> X-Authentication-warning: dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM: meem set sender to peter.memishian@sun.com using -f Status: RO Content-Length: 467 > My concern here is simple: is there a hidden rule along the lines > of MAXLINKNAMELEN must never be greater than LIFNAMSIZ? If there > is, this should be stated somewhere. I thought that went without saying -- things wouldn't work otherwise. The values of these constants and the relationships between them are not part of the documented interface -- the consumer can simply trust that we have given them reasonable values so that things will work. -- meem From casper@holland.sun.com Tue Jan 8 00:50:14 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m088oDvL007496 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 00:50:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m088o5RW017344 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@Sun.COM>; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 16:50:12 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUB0030ZHVLMR00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 01:50:09 -0700 (MST) Received: from dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com ([129.156.101.225]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUB00HEIHVKNV30@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@Sun.COM (ORCPT PSARC-ext@Sun.COM); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 01:50:08 -0700 (MST) Received: from holland (room101.Holland.Sun.COM [129.159.130.93]) by dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m088o0pq005376; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:50:01 +0000 (GMT) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 09:50:00 +0100 From: Casper.Dik@sun.com Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates In-reply-to: <18307.774.589706.729184@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> Sender: casper@holland.sun.com To: Peter.Memishian@sun.com Cc: Gary Winiger , Cathy.Zhou@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss@opensolaris.org, Sebastien.Roy@sun.com Message-id: <200801080850.m088o0pq005376@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200801072104.m07L4FrW009282@marduk.eng.sun.com> <18307.774.589706.729184@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> Status: RO Content-Length: 1678 > > > Thanks. And you're aware that this still leaves dlmgmtd > > vulnerable to attack. Running with uid 0 and no effective > > or permitted privileges still means it has read access to > > all root owned files. > >Yes, and based on a discussion Cathy and I had yesterday, we think it >should be possible to change it to run as "dladm" instead ("noaccess" >seems inappropriate since among other things, having the dlmgmtd door file >owned by "noaccess" seems wrong). While we can try out using the "dladm" >user, this change will have a subtle impact on accessing files that are >either directly or indirectly accessed by dlmgmtd and its libraries, and >thus it may take time to determine with certainty that it will work. > >So, in short, is the use of uid 0 with minimal privileges for a >non-networked daemon a gating issue? Or could a change (if possible) >from uid 0 to the dladm user be done as part of a future case? In most cases we run such daemons as "daemon" (doesn't imply networking or not) after it has initialized. $ ps -fu daemon UID PID PPID C STIME TTY TIME CMD daemon 134 1 0 Dec 21 ? 0:10 /usr/lib/crypto/kcfd daemon 4701 1 0 Dec 21 ? 0:00 /usr/lib/nfs/lockd daemon 4581 1 0 Dec 21 ? 0:00 /usr/sbin/rpcbind daemon 4602 1 0 Dec 21 ? 0:00 /usr/lib/nfs/statd daemon 4916 1 0 Dec 21 ? 0:05 /usr/lib/nfs/nfsmapid daemon 5725 1 0 Dec 21 ? 0:28 /usr/lib/nfs/nfsd Generally speaking, there's no need to introduce a new user or use a uid which has certain other properties (such as owning files) Casper From peter.memishian@sun.com Tue Jan 8 01:53:15 2008 Received: from sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail2sca [129.145.155.234]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m089rFH4008452 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 01:53:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m089r9je023160; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 01:53:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUB0031NKSMY800@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 01:53:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM ([129.158.219.186]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUB003LKKSKU000@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 01:53:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m089qvYM014634; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:52:57 +0800 (CST) Received: (from meem@localhost) by dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id m089qu23014631; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:52:56 +0800 (CST) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:52:56 +0800 From: Peter Memishian Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates In-reply-to: <200801080850.m088o0pq005376@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> To: Casper.Dik@sun.com Cc: peter.memishian@sun.com, Gary Winiger , Cathy.Zhou@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss@opensolaris.org, Sebastien.Roy@sun.com Reply-to: peter.memishian@sun.com Message-id: <18307.18424.499826.353005@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 19) "Constant Variable" XEmacs Lucid Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200801072104.m07L4FrW009282@marduk.eng.sun.com> <18307.774.589706.729184@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> <200801080850.m088o0pq005376@dm-holland-02.uk.sun.com> X-Authentication-warning: dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM: meem set sender to peter.memishian@sun.com using -f Status: RO Content-Length: 1007 > In most cases we run such daemons as "daemon" (doesn't imply networking or > not) after it has initialized. > > $ ps -fu daemon > UID PID PPID C STIME TTY TIME CMD > daemon 134 1 0 Dec 21 ? 0:10 /usr/lib/crypto/kcfd > daemon 4701 1 0 Dec 21 ? 0:00 /usr/lib/nfs/lockd > daemon 4581 1 0 Dec 21 ? 0:00 /usr/sbin/rpcbind > daemon 4602 1 0 Dec 21 ? 0:00 /usr/lib/nfs/statd > daemon 4916 1 0 Dec 21 ? 0:05 /usr/lib/nfs/nfsmapid > daemon 5725 1 0 Dec 21 ? 0:28 /usr/lib/nfs/nfsd > > Generally speaking, there's no need to introduce a new user or use a uid > which has certain other properties (such as owning files) The "dladm" user already exists and owns the files under /etc/dladm. We introduced it so that the dladm(1M) command doesn't need to run as root. Since dlmgmtd writes to files under /etc/dladm, it cannot use "daemon". -- meem From gww@eng.sun.com Tue Jan 8 07:38:18 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m08FcH78013432 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 07:38:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m08FbpcN021607 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 23:38:16 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUC00E2J0RSNI00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:38:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.32]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUC00E7Q0RQIL00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:38:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (marduk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.224]) by dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m08FcCDv010228; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:38:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m08FbGKY011117; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:37:16 -0800 (PST) Received: (from gww@localhost) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11/Submit) id m08FbGqP011116; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:37:16 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:37:16 -0800 (PST) From: Gary Winiger Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates To: gww@eng.sun.com, peter.memishian@sun.com Cc: Cathy.Zhou@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss@opensolaris.org, Sebastien.Roy@sun.com Message-id: <200801081537.m08FbGqP011116@marduk.eng.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 800 > > Thanks. And you're aware that this still leaves dlmgmtd > > vulnerable to attack. Running with uid 0 and no effective > > or permitted privileges still means it has read access to > > all root owned files. > > Yes, and based on a discussion Cathy and I had yesterday, we think it The point is to implement the principle of least privilege, not to run with some state where the daemon can't function. I mentioned it because just having no privileges doesn't always mean the principle of least privilege is met. > So, in short, is the use of uid 0 with minimal privileges for a > non-networked daemon a gating issue? Or could a change (if possible) > from uid 0 to the dladm user be done as part of a future case? If that's what's needed, then that's what's needed ;-) Gary.. From peter.memishian@sun.com Tue Jan 8 07:42:41 2008 Received: from newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (newsunmail1brm.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.62.245]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m08FgfVV013466 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 07:42:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by newsunmail1brm.central.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m08FgavT008852; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 08:42:38 -0700 (MST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUC00F1R0Z21E00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:42:38 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM ([129.158.219.186]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUC00EUQ0Z0IH00@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:42:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m08FgOmn015572; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 23:42:24 +0800 (CST) Received: (from meem@localhost) by dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id m08FgNGc015569; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 23:42:23 +0800 (CST) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 23:42:23 +0800 From: Peter Memishian Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates In-reply-to: <200801081537.m08FbGqP011116@marduk.eng.sun.com> To: Gary Winiger Cc: peter.memishian@sun.com, Cathy.Zhou@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss@opensolaris.org, Sebastien.Roy@sun.com Reply-to: peter.memishian@sun.com Message-id: <18307.39391.93995.197898@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 19) "Constant Variable" XEmacs Lucid Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200801081537.m08FbGqP011116@marduk.eng.sun.com> X-Authentication-warning: dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM: meem set sender to peter.memishian@sun.com using -f Status: RO Content-Length: 327 > > So, in short, is the use of uid 0 with minimal privileges for a > > non-networked daemon a gating issue? Or could a change (if possible) > > from uid 0 to the dladm user be done as part of a future case? > > If that's what's needed, then that's what's needed ;-) Which "that" is being referred to here? -- meem From Darren.Reed@sun.com Tue Jan 8 20:24:35 2008 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m094OYrB010575 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 20:24:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m094OPxI003308 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 04:24:33 GMT Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUD0020108WNB00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:24:33 -0700 (MST) Received: from sineb-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.19.6]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUD004B908V3H80@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:24:32 -0700 (MST) Received: from fe-apac-05.sun.com (fe-apac-05.sun.com [192.18.19.176] (may be forged)) by sineb-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id m094OUdn026674 for ; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 04:24:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-apac.sun.com by mail-apac.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) id <0JUD0060107ETD00@mail-apac.sun.com> (original mail from Darren.Reed@Sun.COM) for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 09 Jan 2008 12:24:30 +0800 (SGT) Received: from [129.158.87.228] by mail-apac.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-6.01 (built Apr 3 2006)) with ESMTPSA id <0JUD00LV108TPBG1@mail-apac.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 09 Jan 2008 12:24:30 +0800 (SGT) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 15:23:59 +1100 From: Darren Reed Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates In-reply-to: <18307.4667.881528.872650@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> Sender: Darren.Reed@sun.com To: Peter.Memishian@sun.com Cc: Cathy Zhou , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <47844C5F.6050202@Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <477D209C.9070604@sun.com> <4782D447.80404@Sun.COM> <18307.1864.206538.71410@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> <47830FED.6030101@Sun.COM> <18307.4667.881528.872650@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.13 (Windows/20070809) Status: RO Content-Length: 1241 Peter Memishian wrote: > > My concern here is simple: is there a hidden rule along the lines > > of MAXLINKNAMELEN must never be greater than LIFNAMSIZ? If there > > is, this should be stated somewhere. > > I thought that went without saying -- things wouldn't work otherwise. > The values of these constants and the relationships between them are > not part of the documented interface -- the consumer can simply trust > that we have given them reasonable values so that things will work. With respect to the implementation/documentation of this constant, I'd like to see talk (in either header comments or documentation) about either one of the above refer to the other so that someone who downloads opensolaris and goes hunting in for things to "tweak" has a clear understanding of the implications of doing so from the get go, rather than when something doesn't work. It would be nice if both MAXLINKNAMELEN and LIFNAMSIZ could be in the same include file but I'm not sure that I like any of the outcomes from doing that ;-( It feels like there is a higher level architecture for networking here that both the link and IP layer are subscribing to but which we're not recognising. But that isn't this case. Darren From peter.memishian@sun.com Tue Jan 8 21:55:56 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m095ttRV011669 for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 21:55:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m095tYkA012545; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 13:55:52 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUD006014H1K000@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:55:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM ([129.158.219.186]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUD00KJR4H0A450@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM>; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:55:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m095tZBs016648; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 13:55:35 +0800 (CST) Received: (from meem@localhost) by dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id m095tYQM016645; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 13:55:34 +0800 (CST) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 13:55:34 +0800 From: Peter Memishian Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates In-reply-to: <47844C5F.6050202@Sun.COM> To: Darren Reed Cc: peter.memishian@sun.com, Cathy Zhou , PSARC-ext@sun.com Reply-to: peter.memishian@sun.com Message-id: <18308.25046.598218.103376@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 19) "Constant Variable" XEmacs Lucid Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <477D209C.9070604@sun.com> <4782D447.80404@Sun.COM> <18307.1864.206538.71410@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> <47830FED.6030101@Sun.COM> <18307.4667.881528.872650@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> <47844C5F.6050202@Sun.COM> X-Authentication-warning: dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM: meem set sender to peter.memishian@sun.com using -f Status: RO Content-Length: 471 > With respect to the implementation/documentation of this constant, > I'd like to see talk (in either header comments or documentation) > about either one of the above refer to the other so that someone > who downloads opensolaris and goes hunting in for > things to "tweak" has a clear understanding of the implications of > doing so from the get go, rather than when something doesn't work. Sure, we'll add such a comment to the header. -- meem From carlsonj@phorcys.east.sun.com Wed Jan 9 04:39:23 2008 Received: from sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (sunmail3mpk [129.146.11.52]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m09CdNuR017762 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 04:39:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (brm-avmta-1.Central.Sun.COM [129.147.4.11]) by sunmail3mpk.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m09CdJQk009421; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 04:39:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUD00J0FN5J6U00@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 05:39:19 -0700 (MST) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com ([129.148.174.143]) by brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUD00BRNN5JCY40@brm-avmta-1.central.sun.com>; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 05:39:19 -0700 (MST) Received: from phorcys.east.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.2+Sun/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m09Cc0Nn011848; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:38:00 -0500 (EST) Received: (from carlsonj@localhost) by phorcys.east.sun.com (8.14.2+Sun/8.14.2/Submit) id m09Cc0T1011845; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:38:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:38:00 -0500 From: James Carlson Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates In-reply-to: <18308.25046.598218.103376@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> To: Peter.Memishian@sun.com Cc: Darren Reed , Cathy Zhou , PSARC-ext@sun.com Message-id: <18308.49192.792680.905928@gargle.gargle.HOWL> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.01 under Emacs 21.3.1 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <477D209C.9070604@sun.com> <4782D447.80404@Sun.COM> <18307.1864.206538.71410@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> <47830FED.6030101@Sun.COM> <18307.4667.881528.872650@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> <47844C5F.6050202@Sun.COM> <18308.25046.598218.103376@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> Status: RO Content-Length: 1244 Peter Memishian writes: > > > With respect to the implementation/documentation of this constant, > > I'd like to see talk (in either header comments or documentation) > > about either one of the above refer to the other so that someone > > who downloads opensolaris and goes hunting in for > > things to "tweak" has a clear understanding of the implications of > > doing so from the get go, rather than when something doesn't work. > > Sure, we'll add such a comment to the header. For what it's worth, if someone is "tweaking" #defines, then either he's an OpenSolaris developer, in which case what he really needs in order to do this right are _design documents_, or he's merely a hacker, in which case he's on his own. Either way, I don't think the concern is architectural in nature. It sounds more like a gate management issue that should be a broader discussion about placing design documentation into source comments as a "best practice" or design constraint for affected consolidations. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking Sun Microsystems / 35 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 From gww@eng.sun.com Wed Jan 9 07:28:11 2008 Received: from sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (sunmail4.Singapore.Sun.COM [129.158.71.19]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m09FSATr020485 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 07:28:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail4.singapore.sun.com (8.13.4+Sun/8.13.3/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m09FRfnM021141 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 23:28:09 +0800 (SGT) Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUD00H1DUYVP500@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:28:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com ([129.146.11.32]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUD00KZSUYTZD90@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:28:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (marduk.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.108.224]) by dm-eng-02.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m09FS1Aq047541; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:28:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from marduk.eng.sun.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m09FR5Mo012477; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:27:05 -0800 (PST) Received: (from gww@localhost) by marduk.eng.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.11/Submit) id m09FR53U012476; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:27:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:27:05 -0800 (PST) From: Gary Winiger Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates To: gww@eng.sun.com, Peter.Memishian@sun.com Cc: Peter.Memishian@sun.com, Cathy.Zhou@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss@opensolaris.org, Sebastien.Roy@sun.com Message-id: <200801091527.m09FR53U012476@marduk.eng.sun.com> Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 Status: RO Content-Length: 570 > > > So, in short, is the use of uid 0 with minimal privileges for a > > > non-networked daemon a gating issue? Or could a change (if possible) > > > from uid 0 to the dladm user be done as part of a future case? > > > > If that's what's needed, then that's what's needed ;-) > > Which "that" is being referred to here? Let me try again: If running with uid == 0 (and no privs) is what is needed to operate correctly, then running with uid == 0 (and no privs) is what is needed. My preference would be running with uid == dladm (and no privs). Gary.. From peter.memishian@sun.com Wed Jan 9 07:36:01 2008 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m09Fa0OJ020680 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 07:36:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (nwk-avmta-2.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.145.155.6]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m09FZehg023701; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 15:35:57 GMT Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUD00I01VBWUJ00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:35:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM ([129.158.219.186]) by nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUD00IGSVBUPJ00@nwk-avmta-2.sfbay.sun.com>; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:35:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m09FZeQA018713; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 23:35:40 +0800 (CST) Received: (from meem@localhost) by dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM (8.14.1+Sun/8.14.1/Submit) id m09FZdQp018709; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 23:35:39 +0800 (CST) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 23:35:39 +0800 From: Peter Memishian Subject: Re: [clearview-discuss] 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates In-reply-to: <200801091527.m09FR53U012476@marduk.eng.sun.com> To: Gary Winiger Cc: peter.memishian@sun.com, Cathy.Zhou@sun.com, PSARC-ext@sun.com, clearview-discuss@opensolaris.org, Sebastien.Roy@sun.com Reply-to: peter.memishian@sun.com Message-id: <18308.59851.498600.515143@dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: VM 7.17 under 21.4 (patch 19) "Constant Variable" XEmacs Lucid Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <200801091527.m09FR53U012476@marduk.eng.sun.com> X-Authentication-warning: dhcp-cbjs05-219-62.PRC.Sun.COM: meem set sender to peter.memishian@sun.com using -f Status: RO Content-Length: 497 > Let me try again: If running with uid == 0 (and no privs) is > what is needed to operate correctly, then running with uid == 0 > (and no privs) is what is needed. My preference would be running > with uid == dladm (and no privs). Got it. From the prototype that Cathy just did, it seems that there are a few issues to work through to ensure that shutdown can be done gracefully. So at this time we'd like to stick with the current proposal of uid 0 and minimal privileges. -- meem From Sebastien.Roy@sun.com Wed Jan 9 10:35:25 2008 Received: from sunmail5.uk.sun.com (sunmail5.UK.Sun.COM [129.156.85.165]) by sac.sfbay.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m09IZP0C000787 for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 10:35:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM (nwk-avmta-1.SFBay.Sun.COM [129.146.11.74]) by sunmail5.uk.sun.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8/ENSMAIL,v2.2) with ESMTP id m09IZ2gb015676 for <@sunmail2sca.sfbay.sun.com:PSARC-ext@sun.com>; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 18:35:24 GMT Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) id <0JUE00A0J3MXR700@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:35:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from brmea-mail-1.sun.com ([192.18.98.31]) by nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-3.04 (built Jul 15 2005)) with ESMTP id <0JUE002LK3MX7B50@nwk-avmta-1.sfbay.Sun.COM> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:35:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from fe-amer-09.sun.com ([192.18.109.79]) by brmea-mail-1.sun.com (8.13.6+Sun/8.12.9) with ESMTP id m09IZLMG000889 for ; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 18:35:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from conversion-daemon.mail-amer.sun.com by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) id <0JUE000010SDFJ00@mail-amer.sun.com> (original mail from Sebastien.Roy@Sun.COM) for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 09 Jan 2008 11:35:21 -0700 (MST) Received: from [192.168.1.3] ([72.93.210.146]) by mail-amer.sun.com (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTPSA id <0JUE00K4V3MEAM20@mail-amer.sun.com> for PSARC-ext@sun.com (ORCPT PSARC-ext@sun.com); Wed, 09 Jan 2008 11:35:02 -0700 (MST) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 13:35:01 -0500 From: Sebastien Roy Subject: Re: 2008/002 Clearview UV Updates In-reply-to: <477D209C.9070604@sun.com> Sender: Sebastien.Roy@sun.com To: PSARC-EXT@sun.com Cc: clearview-discuss Message-id: <478513D5.5000308@sun.com> Organization: Sun Microsystems MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 References: <477D209C.9070604@sun.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071203) Status: RO Content-Length: 58 This case was approved during today's PSARC meeting. -Seb