| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 13:08:58 -0400 (EDT) From: Jonathan Reed <jdreed@....EDU> To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Geoffrey Thomas <geofft@....edu> cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Return ENOEXEC, not ENOENT, if a binary's or script's interpreter doesn't exist. > NAK. Current behaviour is useful -- and it is really file thats > missing. The current behavior is only useful to people who have an understanding of how interpreters and binaries work on Linux. The average desktop user does not have that understanding. The average user gets an error message such as: /usr/bin/foo: No such file or directory. They then go and look at /usr/bin/foo, find that it exists, and are extremely confused. More advanced users might at that point try and run "ldd" on the binary (which will also fail, thanks to a missing interpreter). The average user will never think to run "strings" on the binary and look for /lib/ld-linux.so.1. > Please improve manpage instead. What manpage do you suggest needs improvement? execve(2)? That again requires an average user to realize that they need to go look at the execve(2) manpage. The average user is not going to realize that. -Jon --- Jonathan Reed jdreed@....edu Faculty and Student Experience Information Services & Technology Massachusetts Institute of Technology -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists