Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 14:42:19 +0200 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: Peter Wemm <peter@netplex.com.au> Cc: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>, Soren Schmidt <sos@freebsd.dk>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: HEADSUP! linprocfs going away in 72 hours. Message-ID: <15888.956061739@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 18 Apr 2000 05:35:37 PDT." <20000418123537.A24141CD7@overcee.netplex.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20000418123537.A24141CD7@overcee.netplex.com.au>, Peter Wemm writes : >Julian Elischer wrote: >> I presume this means that it should remain part of the standard system >> but that the source should be moved to /sys/i386/linux? >> >> as long as it remains part of the system I don't care where it lives.. >> It's too massively important to totally drop. Having it as a port was >> a losing proposition. > >The biggest problem is that it re-opens a security hole that was explicitly >patched in procfs. > >Also, the way I see it, the linux procfs should probably only be visible to >linux sysvec processes... It would be a damn shame to let >/compat/linux/procfs "sneak in" to the expected system requirements for bsd >programs so that developers can use the easy way out rather than doing >something properly. Fully agreement here, and that was also what the core decision said: only visible to processed run under the linuxolator. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD coreteam member | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15888.956061739>