[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D131DEA.4050206@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 18:01:14 +0800
From: Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Eugene Teo <eugene@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch] kcore: restrict access to the whole memory
于 2010年12月23日 07:02, Andrew Morton 写道:
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2010 19:21:59 +0800
> Amerigo Wang<amwang@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>> This patch restricts /proc/kcore from accessing the whole memory,
>> instead, only an ELF header can be read.
>>
>> The initial patch was done by Vivek.
>
> Getting a bit tired of this.
>
> Are we supposed to be mind-readers? How else are we to work out why
> you think Linux needs this feature? What problems it solves? What
> applications are expected to break and what the breakage patterns are?
> Why the benefits are worth the maintenance costs and the risk of
> breakage? Why it's done with a config option and not a boot-time or
> runtime tunable?
>
Oh, sorry, I forgot to mention this is for security reasons,
I am adding Eugene into Cc so that he can explain more about this.
Yeah, I thought about sysctl too, but it is really weird for me
to control /proc/kcore contents via an sysctl file, I think
an Kconfig is enough.
Thanks!
--
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