Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 23:38:01 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@cup.hp.com> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: sysctl kern.fallback_elf_brand Message-ID: <20010222233800.A1394@mollari.cthul.hu> In-Reply-To: <3A960EF8.75C3FC53@cup.hp.com>; from marcel@cup.hp.com on Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 11:19:20PM -0800 References: <3A960EF8.75C3FC53@cup.hp.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 11:19:20PM -0800, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > Hi, > > I'm worried about the default value of the kern.fallback_elf_brand syctl > (= 9 -> FreeBSD). It basicly tells the kernel that binaries without any > branding are FreeBSD binaries. Since our binaries are always branded > (AFAICT), this seems to me as the wrong default. > > One problem with this is that unbranded static Linux binaries are > executed as FreeBSD native binaries and there's a high chance of them > rebooting the machine if run as root. > > I think we need to disable the fallback ELF branding when no ABI > compatibility module is loaded. Otherwise we can set the fallback to the > one ABI module, or when multiple are loaded, the first. In the latter > case, the first may not be the preferred one, so we probably need to > have a bit more tuning than simply selecting the first. > > Of course, we can also set the default to 3 (=Linux) under the > assumption that the Linuxulator is the most frequently used ABI module. > > Thoughts? I've run into the unbranded Linux binary reboot before..very annoying. I agree the default should be changed. Kris [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE6lhNYWry0BWjoQKURAqK6AJ4kCDIeOxCAQ9E7XmoRU0ZibQK3cwCeMrly /kdK33lIOIkjO6LyPT6QZQo= =2Qt4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010222233800.A1394>