[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45BEF669.1060600@hitachi.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 16:40:25 +0900
From: "Kawai, Hidehiro" <hidehiro.kawai.ez@...achi.com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Cc: kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
sugita <yumiko.sugita.yf@...achi.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Satoshi OSHIMA <soshima@...hat.com>,
"Hideo AOKI@...hat" <haoki@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] coredump: documentation for proc and sysctl]
Hi Pavel and Andrew,
Pavel Machek wrote:
>>This patch adds the documentation for the following parameters:
>> /proc/<pid>/core_flags
>> /proc/sys/kernel/core_flags_enable
>
> Sysctl seems really strange to me. Either the feature is safe to use,
> or it is not. Users can already ulimit -c 0, and we do not have
> "/proc/sys/kernel/allow_users_to_disable_their_core_dumps".
Oh, I had forgotten that. Thank you for pointing out. The purpose of
this sysctl is to prevent a bad process from hiding its memory.
But as you say, this sysctl isn't enough for the purpose.
Andrew wrote:
> Does this feature have any security implications? For example, there might
> be system administration programs which force a coredump on a "bad"
> process, and leave the core somewhere for the administrator to look at.
I have never heard of the story that ulimit -c 0 bothered an
administrator who wanted to force a coredump. So even without this
sysctl, the administrator wouldn't bother about security concerns.
I'll drop it from the next version.
Thanks,
--
Hidehiro Kawai
Hitachi, Ltd., Systems Development Laboratory
-
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