lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Oct]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: PUBLIC CHALLENGE: (was RE: devfs again, (was RE: USB device a lloc ation) )
Date
From: Horst von Brand [mailto:vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl]
Subject: Re: PUBLIC CHALLENGE: (was RE: devfs again, (was RE: USB device
alloc ation) )

>BTW,
>the entries there allow you to mount _iff_ you have permissions on the
>devices themselves. The permission bits are the systems' last (only?) line
>of defense against miscreants; permissions of devices are extremely
>critical, much more so than even the most critical normal files. Fooling
>around with this if there is no *extremely* good reason is out. Needless to
>say, I've seen only rather weak reasons for some scheme like devfs.

So why not simply let the driver decide upon it's nodes' permissions?

>> The use of a config file to determine permissions/ownership is not
foreign
>> to the kernel or filesystems.

>Name one use of configuration files for local permissions/ownership on
>Unix/Linux.

This is a straw man argument. You take an easy target, knock it down,
and it really doesn't mean anything, but you claim victory. Shame.

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:54    [W:0.079 / U:0.236 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site