runtime: Drop "Barring access control concerns" #730
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This wording landed without comment as part of 7117ede (Expand on the definition of our ops, 2015-10-13, opencontainers#225). However, I'm not entirely clear on the exception it's making. It may be trying to say something like: Just because you were authorized to manage that container when you created it doesn't mean you're still authorized to perform operation X on it now. Maybe you've lost privileges in the meantime. But as far as compliance testing is concerned, the same test harness will be calling 'create' and the subsequent operations. That harness will be reporting MUST violations if the runtime refuses a subsequent operation, and removing the access-control loophole makes it more obvious that the runtime's refusal is non-compliant. Signed-off-by: W. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
|
LGTM |
1 similar comment
|
LGTM |
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This wording landed without comment as part of #225. However, I'm not entirely clear on the exception it's making. It may be trying to say something like:
But as far as compliance testing is concerned, the same test harness will be calling
createand the subsequent operations. That harness will be reporting MUST violations if the runtime refuses a subsequent operation, and removing the access-control loophole makes it more obvious that the runtime's refusal is non-compliant.