From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Apr 3 22:19:25 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from tarantula.cse.Buffalo.EDU (tarantula.cse.Buffalo.EDU [128.205.39.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9169837B419 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2002 22:19:18 -0800 (PST) Received: (from rc27@localhost) by tarantula.cse.Buffalo.EDU (8.11.6+Sun/8.10.1) id g346JHY19400; Thu, 4 Apr 2002 01:19:17 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 01:19:16 -0500 (EST) From: Ramkumar Chinchani To: Terry Lambert Cc: Julian Elischer , "Tim J. Robbins" , Subject: Re: Ptracing each other In-Reply-To: <3CABC203.AAA5229A@mindspring.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII 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 How does make such a distinction inside the kernel? Is it possible to identify trace events in a trace and just ignore them? -Ram ==> Terry Lambert /7:01pm/Apr 3, 2002 <== [Ramkumar Chinchani wrote: [> The requirement is that I have a theoretical framework where no process [> trusts the other. So they watch (trace) each process. [ [Sure. [ [All you have to do is patch the OS to lie to you about not [seeing trace events in a trace... [ [-- Terry [ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message