[lkml]   [2000]   [Oct]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] New ideas for the OOM handler
On Mon, 9 Oct 2000, Byron Stanoszek wrote:
> > it also might be good to have options to kill anything connected to a pty
> > first, and to not kill anything attatched to the console. obviously these
> > leave ways for admins to shoot themselves in the foot, but they could be
> > useful.
> I _had_ thought of that, but I don't know how clear that is in the process
> structure. Malicious users can simply run setsid() to detach from a controlling
> tty, thereby defeating the rule.

Well, I wasn't thinking about killing pty-attatched processes as being
necessarily 100% effective or secure, but merely potentially useful.
Clearly it doesn't help in the case of a malicious forkbombing user.
Sparing console processes seems like it should be reasonably secure though
(at least as secure as your console is).

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 12:39    [W:0.073 / U:6.488 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site