From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Jan 21 16:12:49 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from gnjilux.srk.fer.hr (gnjilux.srk.fer.hr [161.53.70.141]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0591437B404 for ; Mon, 21 Jan 2002 16:12:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from gnjilux.srk.fer.hr (ike@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gnjilux.srk.fer.hr (8.12.1/8.12.1/Debian -5) with ESMTP id g0LNlmLC002178 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2002 00:47:48 +0100 Received: (from ike@localhost) by gnjilux.srk.fer.hr (8.12.1/8.12.1/Debian -5) id g0LNlkuE002172 for hackers@freebsd.org; Tue, 22 Jan 2002 00:47:46 +0100 Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 00:47:46 +0100 From: Ivan Krstic To: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: process creation and deletion Message-ID: <20020121234746.GD17108@gnjilux.cc.fer.hr> Reply-To: Ivan Krstic Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.25i Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi all, I'm looking at implementing some extra security checks for all dying and newly spawned processes. It looks to me like the function that must be called for all process deaths is exit1() in kern_exit.c, and that new processes must be spawned by either execve() in kern_exec.c or fork1() in kern_fork.c. Have I missed any, or are these three functions the only ways processes can come into existence and die? Thanks, Ivan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message