Messages in this thread |  | | From | Alan Cox <> | Subject | Re: Misc Fixes | Date | Wed, 10 Jul 1996 13:25:16 +0100 (BST) |
| |
> I don't want to make it _trivial_ to get at the secure-level, and I think it's > _wrong_ for a module to depend on it (I broke down and added it anyway, because > I haven't gotten the _right_ fix for it, dammit you lazy people!).
It is already trivial. The offset of securelevel references in code of functions a module can access is near enough a constant
> Not allowing module loads is reasonable, actually. That does NOT change the > fact that no module should access "securelevel", which is the original problem.
Yes. Allowing module loads has to be blocked by securelevel
|  |