lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Jan]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: RFC/PATCH: Random pid generation
    Date
    On Thu, 13 Jan 2000, Alan Cox wrote:

    > > This is also a really bad idea, because with easily guessable pids you
    > > are opening yourself to /tmp races. This is actually a argument for
    > > random pids (or fixing the programs).
    >
    > Random pids just slow the process down. Its an argument for writing
    > decent code.

    Clearly the security reasons are bogus, but weren't there efficiency
    reasons for wanting random pids? Like the time it took to find an empty
    slot in the process table for rapidly forking processes? I seem to
    remember a thread about this about a year back.

    Sequential processes are nice for sysadmins, it makes it possible to
    figure out execution order occassionally, estimate how quickly processes
    are forking, etc. Programs that rely on randomness of time() getpid() for
    any form of security are so naive that they likely have numerous other
    exploitable problems and no simple concession by the kernel is going to
    help matters.

    --
    "Love the dolphins," she advised him. "Write by W.A.S.T.E.."


    -
    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 13:55    [W:0.039 / U:0.788 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site