netdev - Re: [PATCH 0/59] Cleanup sysctl

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: <45AD1AD7.7030804@zytor.com>
Date:	Tue, 16 Jan 2007 10:35:03 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Containers <containers@...ts.osdl.org>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/59] Cleanup sysctl

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> 
>> I think it would be fair to say that if they're not in <linux/sysctl.h> they're
>> not architectural, but that doesn't resolve the counterpositive (are there
>> sysctls in <linux/sysctl.h> which aren't architectural?  From the looks of it, I
>> would say yes.)  Non-architectural sysctl numbers should not be exported to
>> userspace, and should eventually be rejected by sys_sysctl.
> 
> This last bit doesn't make much sense.  I believe you are saying all sysctl
> numbers should be per architecture.
> 

With "architectural" I mean "guaranteed to be stable" (as opposed to 
"incidental").  Sorry for the confusion.

	-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html