lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Jul]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: TO HELL WITH IT THEN......(re: disk-destroyer.c)
On Fri, 21 Jul 2000 bodnar42@bodnar42.dhs.org wrote:

> To carry on the networking metaphor, imagine writing an app that tries to
> write() on a unconnected socket, and when you ran it as root it
> would cause your kernel to panick. Fixing this would not be considered an
> "added layer of protection against broken apps", it would be considered a
> bug fix. This is only different in that the interface is used less often,
> and misuse can cause more damage.

The difference being that root _is_ allowed to crash the kernel. No, this
is more a question of providing a "cooked" interface or not. I generally
believe in cooked itnerfaces when they can abstract away differences in
lower levels. However, given the possible damage caused by an error I can
certainly understand if Linus chooses to include it.

The discussion has not been so much whether this patch is a good idea as
it has been about the claim that it is a security patch protecting from a
malicious root.

Peter
--
Peter Svensson ! Pgp key available by finger, fingerprint:
<petersv@psv.nu> ! 8A E9 20 98 C1 FF 43 E3 07 FD B9 0A 80 72 70 AF
<petersv@df.lth.se> !
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Remember, Luke, your source will be with you... always...



-
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 13:57    [W:0.212 / U:0.444 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site