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: <496BCB7A.2010804@tmr.com>
Date:	Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:00:10 -0500
From:	Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
To:	Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>
CC:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Linux killed Kenny, bastard!

Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 04:19:31PM +0000, Alan Cox (alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk) wrote:
>>> Yes, it could be done. If inotify will not be killed itself, will be
>>> enabled in the config and daemon will be started.
>>> But right now there is no way to solve that task, in the long term this
>>> is a good idea to implement modulo security problems it may concern.
>> It is perfectly soluble right now, use the existing /proc interface. If
>> you want to specifically victimise new tasks first then set everything
>> else with an adjust *against* being killed and new stuff will start off
>> as cannon fodder until classified.
>>
>> The name approach is the wrong way to handle this. It has no reflection
>> of heirarchy of process, targetting by users, containers etc.. 
>>
>> In fact containers are probably the right way to do it
> 
> Containers to solve oom-killer selection problem? :)
> 
> Being more serious, I agree that having a simple name does not solve the
> problem if observed from any angle, but it is not the main goal.
> Patch solves oom-killer selection issue from likely the most commonly
> used case: when you know who should be checked and killed first when
> problem appears.
> 
The only cases in which this would really be useful is when running some 
software which once in a great while goes super prompt critical and starts 
throwing processes of a known name format in all directions, or when you have a 
problem and know the process names involved before OOM kills everything in sight.

This does have a strange attraction, I did save the patch in case another "every 
few years" problem comes up.

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@....com>
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ