netdev - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix /proc/net in presence of net namespaces

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 04 Mar 2008 15:23:59 -0700
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...nvz.org>,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix /proc/net in presence of net namespaces

Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org> writes:

>> 
>> It takes a little updating of how we use pids.  The easiest method
>> is to add an extra counter.  So we know when someone besides the hash
>> chains is using the pid as an id.  However it might make sense to actually
>> have a net namespace pointer in the pid.
>
> No, please, no. I'm strongly opposed to making pids provide identification
> for anything we need in the kernel.

I don't see the problem.  Sessions and process groups are roughly the
same kinds of concept as namespaces.

However I do agree that not using any kind of id is cleaner, leaves us
with less legacy that we have to deal with, and keeps struct pid
small, so it is preferable.

Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html