linux-kernel - Re: Hardening debugfs (Was Re: [PATCH] debugfs: more tightly restrict default mount mode)

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: <20120829040935.GB21265@kroah.com>
Date:	Tue, 28 Aug 2012 21:09:35 -0700
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
Cc:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Ludwig Nussel <ludwig.nussel@...e.de>,
	Alessandro Rubini <rubini@...dd.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Hardening debugfs (Was Re: [PATCH] debugfs: more tightly
 restrict default mount mode)

On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 05:55:45PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
> I've always been a bit confused by the debugfs design, which seems a
> giant compost heap like /proc where we find a specific styrofoam cup
> useful and the temporary thing becomes permanent. (Why is there _one_
> debugfs?)

The rules for debugfs are very simple:
	There are no rules.

That's it.  It's up to the kernel developer to do what they need to do,
for debugging stuff, how ever they best see fit.

Yes, it replaces proc for all of the debugging stuff that shouldn't have
been there before, how it's structured, is up to the developer adding
the code.

greg k-h
--
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/