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: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 22:13:48 -0400 From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> Cc: "Richard W.M. Jones" <rjones@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, mingo@...hat.com, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, luto@...nel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, zab <zab@...hat.com>, emunson@...mai.com, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>, josh@...htriplett.org, Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>, sfr@...b.auug.org.au, Milosz Tanski <milosz@...in.com>, rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, arnd@...db.de, ebiederm@...ssion.com, gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>, iulia manda21 <iulia.manda21@...il.com>, dave hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, mguzik <mguzik@...hat.com>, adobriyan@...il.com, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>, linux-api <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>, gorcunov@...il.com, fw@...eb.enyo.de, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] vfs: Define new syscall getumask. On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 09:01:25PM +0000, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > I'm actually discussing 3 separate things here: the umask, sigmask, and > cpu affinity mask. The last two are available in /proc/<pid>/status --- which brings up the question why not just add umask to /proc/<pid>/status? That way the shared library can read it via /proc/self/status, but this way it would be possible to look at other process's umask values this as well. > >> Another approach to this has been attempted before, adding something > >> to /proc, although it didn't go anywhere. See: > >> > >> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1292109 ... and indeed that's what I suggested. It looks like from the thread that it petered out due to apathy instead of people not liking the idea. One other reason to suggest using a /proc file is that you're not at the mercy of the glibc folks to wire up a new system call. (Glibc has been refusing to wire up getrandom(2), for example. Grrrr.....) - Ted
Powered by blists - more mailing lists