Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 11 Aug 1997 15:31:58 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Brian Mitchell <brian@firehouse.net>
To:        Sean Eric Fagan <sef@Kithrup.COM>
Cc:        ache@nagual.pp.ru, bde@zeta.org.au, current@FreeBSD.ORG, security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: procfs patch
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSI.3.95.970811153015.23837E-100000@shell.firehouse.net>
In-Reply-To: <199708111545.IAA08497@kithrup.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 11 Aug 1997, Sean Eric Fagan wrote:

> >Just close the procfs file descriptors on exec?
> 
> I thought about doing that.  But I decided it was both too invasive, and too
> bothersome -- a root process would gets its fd's close, and it probably
> shouldn't.

Maybe not. If you are root and execute a setuid program, is P_SUGID set? I
would think not, but I have not checked.

> 
> As I said, what I've got now should provide no more risks than dumping core
> does.  Well, it allows for some greater control -- my truss program is not
> SUID root, and needs to be able to read process memory.  But since the
> process should be owned by the user, I don't have a problem with it.
> 
> Sean.
> 

Now -- how about disallowing access if the binary is unreadable :)






Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSI.3.95.970811153015.23837E-100000>