Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 11 Jan 1999 10:37:13 +0000 | From | Jamie Lokier <> | Subject | Re: Porting vfork() |
| |
On Sun, Jan 10, 1999 at 12:33:00PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: > Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> wrote: > > You could make it a special kind of killable - where you can _only_ > > kill it (ie only fatal signals will be serviced), and that would work. > > I wouldn't do that until people actually start to complain. It's not a > > security issue, as the parent _can_ be killed - you just have to kill > > the child first. > > Somebody needs to think about: while(1){vfork();}
Somebody also needs to think about setuid root programs doing:
if (!vfork()) {setreuid(Someone_Else,Someone_Else); /* Stuff */; execve(...);}
While Someone_Else is busy sending SIGSTOPs to all their processes.
I know setuid programs _ought_ to be aware of security issues and presumably not use vfork() here.
Is this change going to affect any of the existing ones?
-- Jamie
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |