|
Message-ID: <CACLa4puR6W+15KxpZtzAt6c2fXUhM8gkLY9Zn5RNE8qbNpO_xQ@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 14:48:15 -0500 From: Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org> To: Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com> Cc: kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com, Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] proc: restrict access to /proc/interrupts On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 2:29 PM, Vasiliy Kulikov <segoon@...nwall.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 11:18 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > As to procfs, I see no real need of adding mode/group mount option for > global procfs files (/proc/interrupts, /proc/stat, etc.) - it can be > done by distro specific init scripts (chown+chmod). I don't mind > against such an option for the convenience, though. While possible, the chmod+chown 'solutions' just aren't as simple as you pretend. Every time one creates a chroot environment and mounts /proc it has be manually fixed there as well. Same thing with a container. Sure if /proc were something that was only ever mounted one time on a box it wouldn't be so bad, but that's not the case.....
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.