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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <470CDDFC.8010307@davidnewall.com> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 23:43:16 +0930 From: David Newall <david@...idnewall.com> To: Gustavo Chain <g@...f.cl> CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Reserve N process to root Gustavo Chain wrote: > El Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:14:06 +0930 > David Newall <david@...idnewall.com> escribió: > >> Gustavo Chain wrote: >> >>> El Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:19:27 +0930 >>> David Newall <david@...idnewall.com> escribió: >>> >>> >>>> Gustavo Chain wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> I think it's necessary to reserve some pids to the super user. >>>>> 5 must be sufficient. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Why? (Sorry if I missed something.) >>>> >>>> >>> ¿ To prevent a posible DoS ? >>> >>> >> That was what I thought you had in mind; it protects from some kind >> of fork bomb, right? But it doesn't seem useful unless you guarantee >> having a process already running (with CAP_SYS_ADMIN) *before* the >> bomb goes off. >> > > Not really, because fork bomb will never reach maximum pid possible. > And root will always have a "slot" to kill desired processes. > This is like pulling teeth: painful. I don't think you have satisfactorily explained why it's necessary. "To prevent a possible DoS" isn't sufficient by itself. I think you should explain the scenarios you have in mind. - 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