linux-kernel - Re: 4096 byte limit to /proc/PID/environ ?

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]

Message-ID: <46C33700.1060605@zytor.com>
Date:	Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:25:20 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Guy Streeter <guy.streeter@...il.com>
CC:	James Pearson <james-p@...ing-picture.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 4096 byte limit to /proc/PID/environ ?

Guy Streeter wrote:
> On 6/1/06, James Pearson <james-p@...ing-picture.com> wrote:
>> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>> I think this is the wrong approach.
>>>
>>> Many of these should probably be converted to seq_file, but in the
>>> particular case of environ, the right approach is to observe the fact
>>> that reading environ is just like reading /proc/PID/mem, except:
>>>
>>>  a. the access restrictions are less strict, and
>>>  b. there is a range restriction, which needs to be enforced, and
>>>  c. there is an offset.
>>>
>>> Pretty much, take the guts from /proc/PID/mem and generalize it
>>> slightly, and you have the code that can run either /proc/PID/mem or
>>> /proc/PID/environ.
>> The following patch is based on the /proc/PID/mem code appears to work fine.
>>
> 
> This thread has gone stale. The PAGE_SIZE limit still exists. Is this
> solution acceptable?
> 

Can we avoid the code duplication?

	-hpa
-
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/