[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081121150851.GA15789@ioremap.net>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 18:08:51 +0300
From: Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
Cc: Robert Love <rlove@...ve.org>, mtk.manpages@...il.com,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [take 3] Use pid in inotify events.
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 03:57:09PM +0100, Pavel Machek (pavel@...e.cz) wrote:
> > John & I intentionally did not add the pid field when writing inotify
> > for reasons of security and questionable need. It also stinks to have
> > to add a pid field to the event structure if that field is seldom
> > used.
>
> ...plus the permission check was quite strange. We don't normally try
> to hide PIDs, and 'equal uid' is very non-standard test. can_ptrace()
> is normally used for such stuff...
That's what Reobert suggested as a security measure. Expect this
decision will not be described in details, why it is good or bad.
I'm prefectly fine without this check either.
--
Evgeniy Polyakov
--
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