2008/055 Solaris Bridging

[Darren Reed]

James Carlson wrote:
> Darren J Moffat writes:
>   
>> Darren Reed wrote:
>>     
>>> James Carlson wrote:
>>>       
>>>> ...
>>>>         
>>>>> Some other questions....
>>>>> What is the rights profile for bridging?
>>>>>     
>>>>>           
>>>> No new rights profile or change to existing profiles is needed.  The
>>>> existing "Network Link Security" and "Network Management" rights
>>>> profiles include dladm with sufficient privilege (as documented in
>>>> this project) to allow administration of bridges
>>>>         
>>> Will the daemon also be associated with one or both of these?
>>>       
>> Why should it be ?  The daemon should only be started by SMF.  While it 
>> is possible to write the SMF manifest such that it uses an exec_attr 
>> profile rather than explicit credential entries I don't think that is 
>> necessary.  In fact I'd say that unless the daemon is intended to also 
>> be started by a normal user (for something other than debug purposes) 
>> then using an RBAC profile in the SMF manifest just encourages users to 
>> think they can start the daemon manually (of course the daemon can be 
>> coded to check it is actually running under SMF and refuse to start!).
>>     
>
> Exactly and, no, the user will not be expected to start the daemon
> manually.  It requires SMF data to start correctly anyway.
>
> (And, yes, the daemon will run with least privilege.)
>
> I need to update the specification for this case, so I've placed it in
> "waiting need spec" until I can draft a new document.
>   

I was actually going to let both of the questions in that email
of mine slide...I went back and did some more reading,
noticed that the daemon itself was a private interface (and
thus it isn't expected to be run manually by a user.)

The other question I asked was answered by Jim, I just
didn't plug everything together w.r.t profile names and
authorisations.

Darren