linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv10 man-pages 5/5] execveat.2: initial man page for execveat(2)

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: <20150109215042.GM22149@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Fri, 9 Jan 2015 21:50:42 +0000
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx>
Cc:	David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>,
	"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Meredydd Luff <meredydd@...atehouse.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
	linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	sparclinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv10 man-pages 5/5] execveat.2: initial man page for
 execveat(2)

On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 04:28:52PM -0500, Rich Felker wrote:

> The "magic open-once magic symlink" approach is really the cleanest
> solution I can find. In the case where the interpreter does not open
> the script, nothing terribly bad happens; the magic symlink just
> sticks around until _exit or exec. In the case where the interpreter
> opens it more than once, you get a failure, but as far as I know
> existing interpreters don't do this, and it's arguably bad design. In
> any case it's a caught error.

You know what's cleaner than that?  git revert 27d6ec7ad
It has just been merged; until 3.19 it's fair game for removal.

And yes, I should've NAKed the damn thing loud and clear, rather than
asking questions back then, getting no answers and letting it slip.
Mea culpa.

Back then the procfs-free environments had been pushed as a serious argument
in favour of merging the damn thing.  Now you guys turn around and say that
we not only need procfs mounted, we need a yet-to-be-added kludge in there
to cope with the actual intended uses.
--
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/