[lkml]   [1999]   [Jul]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Patch: CLONE_PPID (was kernel thread support - LWP's)
On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 06:43:37PM -0500, Tim Hockin wrote:
> Here is the first patch I threw together for CLONE_PPID support. This is
> against 2.2.10.
> Concept: a child should be able to create siblings (children of its
> parent) if the parent lets it.
> clone() now has two new flags:
> CLONE_PPIDOK : resulting child may create siblings
> CLONE_PPID : resulting child should be a sibling
> PF_FLAGS has a new entry PF_PPIDOK, which is set by CLONE_PPIDOK

Why do we need PPIDOK? What's the issue that I'm overlooking which makes
it matter if a child can create siblings without the parent's okay? (lets
ignore moral issues here and concentrate on security ones :-)

If there is a security issue here which I've overlooked, do we need a
mechanism for clearing the PPIDOK flag? Perhaps on exec()?

Matthew Wilcox <>
"Windows and MacOS are products, contrived by engineers in the service of
specific companies. Unix, by contrast, is not so much a product as it is a
painstakingly compiled oral history of the hacker subculture." - N Stephenson

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:53    [W:0.175 / U:1.684 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site