![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Sat, 2006-10-07 at 23:14 +0400, Stas Sergeev wrote: > Hello. > > Ulrich Drepper wrote: > >> Now, as the access(X_OK) is fixed, would it be > >> feasible for ld.so to start using it? > > Just must be kidding. No access control can be reliably implemented at > > userlevel. There is no point starting something as stupid as this. > But in this case how can you ever solve the > problem of ld.so executing the binaries for which > the user does not have an exec permission? > Yes, the userspace apps usually should not enforce > the kernel's access control, correct > but ld.so seems to be > the special case - it is a kernel helper after all, in what way is ld.so special in ANY way? -- if you want to mail me at work (you don't), use arjan (at) linux.intel.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-10-08 10:37 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||