[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110930201256.GB5173@albatros>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 00:12:56 +0400
From: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm00@...il.com>
Cc: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>, Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, Kees Cook <kees@...ntu.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: restrict access to /proc/meminfo
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 13:03 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> meminfo has been around for a very long time and is a convenient and
> centralised point for collecting memory data. There will be a large
> number of apps/scripts/tools out there which use it. Many of these
> won't even be available to us.
>
> All of which makes it very hard for us to predict how much breakage we
> will cause.
>
> > If we care about (2), we should pass non-zero counters, but imagine some
> > default values, which will result in sane processes numbers. But it
> > might depend on specific applications, I'm not aware whether (2) is
> > real.
> >
> >
> > Other ideas?
>
> echo "chmod 0400 /proc/meminfo" >> /etc/rc.local
How will it help to fix apps' dependencies on meminfo?
--
Vasiliy Kulikov
http://www.openwall.com - bringing security into open computing environments
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.
