Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 15 Jun 1998 11:44:03 +0000 (GMT) | From | Tigran Aivazian <> | Subject | Re: BUGFIX: 2.1.106 (and earlier) /proc/<pid>/* does not honour setuid(2). |
| |
Hello guys,
I now disagree with my previous opinion and think that the patch I submitted (and the corresponding half of Vadim's patch) is incorrect.
In fact, on some other OS things behave in the way I thought are correct and I even raised a security_all to make things the way like Linux does.
The reason I am changing my mind is (as Alan kindly explained) it is not secure to update sensitive parts (like mem) of /proc/<pid>/* after the program changed its identity.
Perhaps we have two choices:
a) leave things as they are now.
b) provide a separate fill_inode() for each (or some) nodes in /proc/<pid>/* that should honour setuid(2)?
What do you think, people?
Regards, ------ Tigran A. Aivazian | http://www.sco.com/ Escalations Research Group | Email: tigran@sco.com Santa Cruz Operation Ltd |
On Mon, 15 Jun 1998, Vadim E. Kogan wrote:
> Hmm.. please look @ my previous post in linux-kernel. There are fixes > for both 2.0 and 2.1. In your fix you forgot to kill unneeded line. > > Vadim >
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
| |