[cap-talk] "Ambient capability"

[Mark Miller]

POSIX "capabilities" are not capabilities. They are not
capabilities-as-rows. They are not capabilities-as-keys. And they are
not object-capabilities. As explained in Capability Myths Demolished
(see the large table), they actually have more similarities to ACLs
than they do to any capability model.

On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Rob Meijer<capibara at xs4all.nl> wrote:
> On Fri, July 10, 2009 12:13, Matej Kosik wrote:
>> Kevin Reid wrote:
>>> Someone just wrote this page on the erights.org wiki:
>>>
>>>    http://wiki.erights.org/wiki/Ambient_capability
>>>
>>> I've never seen this term before and the description feels a little
>>> off. Would the scholars and taxonomists of cap-talk please review/edit
>>> this article?
>>
>> If I understand the term "ambient authority"
>> http://wiki.erights.org/wiki/Ambient_authority
>> and "capability"
>> http://wiki.erights.org/wiki/Capability
>> correctly, then "ambient capability" is an oxymoron.
>>
>> I have some questions (towards the author):
>> http://wiki.erights.org/wiki/Talk:Ambient_authority
>>
>> What are some concrete examples of `ambient capabilities'?
>
>
> I'm not sure if it matches the article, but POSIX capabilities are ambient
> and are called capabilities, so IMO POSIX capbilities would be a concrete
> example of ambient capabilities.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cap-talk mailing list
> cap-talk at mail.eros-os.org
> http://www.eros-os.org/mailman/listinfo/cap-talk
>



-- 
Text by me above is hereby placed in the public domain

    Cheers,
    --MarkM