Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 7 Sep 2013 11:03:13 +0400
From:      Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Jamie Gritton <jamie@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r255316 - head/sys/kern
Message-ID:  <20130907070313.GO4574@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <522A25FA.5060008@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <201309061732.r86HWTha054904@svn.freebsd.org> <20130906181826.GL4574@FreeBSD.org> <522A25FA.5060008@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
  Jamie,

On Fri, Sep 06, 2013 at 12:59:06PM -0600, Jamie Gritton wrote:
J> > J> +
J> > J> +		/*
J> > J> +		 * As in the non-jail case, non-root users are expected to be
J> > J> +		 * able to read kernel/phyiscal memory (provided /dev/[k]mem
J> > J> +		 * exists in the jail and they have permission to access it).
J> > J> +		 */
J> > J> +	case PRIV_KMEM_READ:
J> > J>  		return (0);
J> > J>  
J> > J>  		/*
J> > 
J> > Was that discussed anywhere or reviewed by anyone?
J> 
J> Yes, it was brought up by jase@ in src-committers last week, noting that
J> my original PRIV_KMEM_* commit (r252841) broke existing jail behavior.
J> The entire "discussion" was the mention of the problem and my mention of
J> what it would take to fix it. There was no code review as such, but that
J> seemed appropriate for an obvious one-liner.

I'm sorry then.

Does that mean that we always have had ability for a jail-root to
investigate kernel memory?

-- 
Totus tuus, Glebius.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130907070313.GO4574>