[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20120217154213.ecf4f7b4.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:42:13 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Federica Teodori
<federica.teodori@...glemail.com>, Lucian Adrian Grijincu
<lucian.grijincu@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Peter Zijlstra
<a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, Randy Dunlap
<rdunlap@...otime.net>, Dan Rosenberg <drosenberg@...curity.com>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2012.2] fs: symlink restrictions on sticky directories
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:36:09 -0800
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> > I think I disagree with this. __If the person compiling the kernel
> > includes the feature in his kernel via the time-honoured process of
> > "wtf is that thing? __Yeah, whatev", it gets turned on by default. __This
> > could easily result in weird failures which would take a *long* time
> > for an unsuspecting person to debug.
> >
> > Would it not be kinder to our users to start this out as
> > turned-off-at-runtime unless the kernel configurer has deliberately
> > gone in and enabled it?
>
> There was a fair bit of back-and-forth discussion about it.
> Originally, I had it disabled, but, IIRC, Ingo urged me to have it be
> the default. I can sent a patch to disable it if you want.
What is the reasoning behind the current setting?
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.
