| 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: <52A5357A.8030506@oracle.com> Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2013 22:14:02 -0500 From: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com> To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> CC: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: fs: proc: lockdep spew and questions On 12/08/2013 05:10 PM, Al Viro wrote: > On Sun, Dec 08, 2013 at 03:57:53PM -0500, Sasha Levin wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I've been looking at permissions in procfs, and noticed that >> directories are usually added with execute permission. >> >> As far as I know, there's nothing executable by default inside >> procfs, and on top of that, many of the files there don't deal well >> with being executed so it's easy to cause lockdep spews (one below). >> >> Is there a reason execute bit is set for directories? > > Take any introductory textbook on Unix and read the chapter on permissions. > Or say chmod a-x ~, if you prefer education by self-LART... > Uh, forgot about that. So how would you suggest to deal with the execution issue in procfs? Thanks, Sasha -- 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