Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 9 Jul 1999 15:50:07 -0400 (EDT) | From | Chris Wing <> | Subject | Re: QUESTION: 32-bit UIDs and Linux 2.3 |
| |
Albert:
Thanks for writing back-- I thought about these same things when I first wrote the patch...
> Suggested rules:
> 3. Let unprivileged processes get garbage UID values. The software > isn't very dangerous, and it might work fine. > > 4. If any large UID is ever set for any process, privileged processes > must not be allowed to make any 16-bit calls. Log the problem, > stop the process, and return failure if the process continues. >
I thought about doing something like this, but I think it would end up being more overhead than it is worth. I don't think that it is unreasonable to say "don't run any old statically linked binaries as root if you have more than 65,535 users". Anyway, this approach can't catch all problems- what if someone's code uses a short int internally but is linked against glibc?
> 5. Have a run-time config option to kill any privileged process that > tries to use a 16-bit call. > > 6. Have a run-time config option to allow 16-bit calls from privileged > processes that are not setuid.
Again, when/if 32-bit UIDs become standard in Linux, I don't think _any_ of the typical distributions would include any programs intended to be run as root that are not linked against glibc.
Thanks,
Chris Wing wingc@engin.umich.edu
- 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/
| |