[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55805D0B.6020309@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2015 10:29:47 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@...il.com>,
One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...onical.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Austin Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@...il.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjanvandeven@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: ioperm is kept on fork
On 06/16/2015 09:42 AM, Alex Henrie wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could one of you knowledgeable kernel developers comment on
> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99911 ? The man pages
> maintainer wants to know when this behavior changed.
>
I know that I wrote a program which required I/O privileges at some
point, and it called ioperm() in a setuid wrapper. This was in the late
90s. I suspect we'd have to do a bit of a deep dive to double-check;
the old ioperm() code which only supported the ISA port range to avoid
having to copy the bitmap might be good to look at.
-hpa
--
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