[PATCH V3 04/10] capabilities: use root_priveleged inline to clarify logic

[Serge E. Hallyn]

Quoting Richard Guy Briggs (rgb at redhat.com):
> On 2017-08-25 15:58, James Morris wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Aug 2017, Richard Guy Briggs wrote:
> > 
> > > Introduce inline root_privileged() to make use of SECURE_NONROOT
> > > easier to read.
> > > 
> > > Suggested-by: Serge Hallyn <serge at hallyn.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Richard Guy Briggs <rgb at redhat.com>
> > > ---
> > >  security/commoncap.c |    9 +++++----
> > >  1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > 
> > Acked-by: James Morris <james.l.morris at oracle.com>
> 
> Does anyone have the appetite to move this helper function to
> include/linux/securebits.h along with issecure() to make it more widely
> available?

If it's going to have wider scope, then it probably needs to be
renamed to be unambiguous in any context.  root_implies_privilege
or uid0_is_privileged maybe?   Maybe root_privileged() is ok...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-security-module" in
the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html