Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 21 Mar 2008 04:15:54 +0300 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 5/5] ptrace: it is fun to strace /sbin/init |
| |
On 03/21, Pavel Machek wrote: > > On Thu 2008-03-20 19:57:56, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > On 03/20, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > > > > Ptracing of /sbin/init is not allowed. Of course, this is very dangerous, but > > > > may be useful. Introduce the kernel boot parameter to allow this. > > > ... > > > > @@ -803,6 +803,8 @@ and is between 256 and 4096 characters. > > > > Run specified binary instead of /sbin/init as init > > > > process. > > > > > > > > + init_ptrace [KNL] Allows to ptrace init. Very dangerous. Don't use. > > > > + > > > > > > I don't know what ptracing init is good for, and I believe people > > > wanting to do this kind of special stuff can patch their own kernel... > > > > Yes sure. But could you explain why this can be bad given that ptracing > > init needs the explicit boot parameter? IOW, could you explain why you > > don't like this small and trivial change which adds a minimal impact? > > "It can't be bad, its optional". > > It is bad exactly _because_ it is optional. Anything that adds boot > parameter is *not* trivial...
You are right. I'd prefer to make /sbin/init ptraceable unconditionally, the root should know what it does. But this will change the historical behaviour.
> Why not add > > please_randomly_corrupt_memory boot parameter? It may be useful for > something... > Pavel
Nice argument.
Oleg.
| |