Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 10:56:48 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: martinko <martinkov@pobox.sk> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, kris@obsecurity.org Subject: Re: procfs in 5.4 Message-ID: <20050524175648.GA79215@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <42936977.8040406@pobox.sk> References: <42936977.8040406@pobox.sk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--gKMricLos+KVdGMg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 07:50:47PM +0200, martinko wrote: > hi, >=20 > i've been wondering long time what's the actual state of procfs in freebs= d. >=20 > yes, i added procfs line to fstab but i do not mount it automatically at > system startup. > yet i'm still able to use ps(1) unlike the originator of this thread. > how come? It's recommended not to use it unless you need to (at least on systems with untrusted users) because of the history of local security vulnerabilities. > i believe i've read somewhere that (use of) procfs was dropped or > something and freebsd does not use it anymore. if so, i'm asking why and > then why did the originator of this thread have problem running ps(1) > without procfs mounted? ps doesn't use (and never did use, afaik) procfs for normal operation. There is one function of ps that needs procfs, which is what the original poster was enquiring about. Kris --gKMricLos+KVdGMg Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFCk2rgWry0BWjoQKURAhkJAJ4+QW1CCbM5t9lS+ChQryjMUPIvSgCg56/f ANoE7CsGTVo4sjRxsCw7bg8= =XMby -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --gKMricLos+KVdGMg--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050524175648.GA79215>