[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20060809200019.0bd5eecd.froese@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 20:00:19 +0200
From: Edgar Toernig <froese@....de>
To: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...l.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, tytso@....edu,
tigran@...itas.com
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] revoke/frevoke system calls V2
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> Ar Mer, 2006-08-09 am 10:41 +0200, ysgrifennodd Edgar Toernig:
> > > If I own the file I can make it a symlink to a pty/tty pair
> > > I can revoke a pty/tty pair
> >
> > With the EIO/EOF behaviour that's not a problem - apps that deal
> > with ttys have to expect that condition.
>
> Think about it a moment - I can symlink any file to a tty/pty pair so
> any file I own you open might be a tty.
Yes, OK. The EIO/EOF behaviour is fine. Even for regular files it's
not something extraordinary.
> > Hmm... which apps have an open fd on block devices? Usually a
>
> cdrecord, cd audio players, eject, ....
And killing them is not OK? "fuser -km /dev/cdrom" already covers both
cases, mounted somewhere and opened for special access.
Sorry if I sound a little bit anal. IMO, a generic revoke is a pretty
sharp sword which is given to ordinary users and I have a very uneasy
feeling. They can dig in the innards of other people's processes - a
clean headshot by root is something different ...
Ciao, ET.
-
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