pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: pcp security?

To: "Peter J. MASON" <petem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: pcp security?
From: Dean Johnson <dtj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 20:55:23 -0600
Cc: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx, kristoph@xxxxxxxxxx
References: <38CD8D99.A381DA05@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: dtj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
"Peter J. MASON" wrote:
> 
> Our reading of PCP doesn't uncover any means of supporting a set of
> metrics which are visible to some users and not others.
> Though there seems to be some sort of "context" concept with the PMAPI,
> it doesn't appear to include a user ID context to use in such occasions.
> Instead monitoring happens in the agent process (itself a daemon) owner,
> which is too coarse if there is only one such daemon.
> 
> Has any thought been put into this aspect? If not, then we'd like to
> investigate including this somehow, possibly based on modifying
> pmNewContext()
> to accept and use a user ID for the PM_CONTEXT_HOST type. We'd be
> seeking to have a relevent agent forked off with a particular user ID in
> order to handle
> requests in the user's context.
> 
> We're not as familiar with the architecture as we'd need to be, but does
> this sound feasible?
> 

The problem is that any addition of crypto stuff for authentication
causes the
US government to get a little creepy about export restrictions, etc. Not
sure of
the specifics, but just a heads up.

        -Dean Johnson

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>