Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 21 Jul 2000 13:44:13 +0200 (CEST) | From | Peter Svensson <> | Subject | Re: 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/
| |