[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110620141951.GA11607@albatros>
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 18:19:51 +0400
From: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>
To: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/5 v4] procfs: add hidepid= and gid=
mount options
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 18:11 +0400, Solar Designer wrote:
> Vasiliy -
>
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 04:58:10PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> > gid= is bad choice because
> > a) e. g. VFAT uses uid=/gid= mount options to make all inodes to have
> > certain uid/gid
> > b) uid=/gid=, IIRC, will be added as generic VFS mount options (like ro)
> > with semantics described in a)
> >
> > so having different semantics for /proc won't be good.
>
> I lost track of your proposals/patches. Aren't you currently proposing
> that gid= would make all inodes have the specified gid? If not, why
> not? Such semantics sound fine to me. That's what gid= does on procfs
> on Linux 2.4.x-ow.
With taskstats and similar mechanisms IMO it's better to use sysctls
instead of procfs mount options as it would influence not only on procfs
files.
Thanks,
--
Vasiliy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
