From owner-freebsd-security Sat Sep 18 23:29:44 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.40.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECC6915045 for ; Sat, 18 Sep 1999 23:29:40 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id IAA14491; Sun, 19 Sep 1999 08:27:18 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Matthew Dillon Cc: "Rodney W. Grimes" , imp@village.org (Warner Losh), liam@tiora.net (Liam Slusser), kdrobnac@mission.mvnc.edu (Kenny Drobnack), Harry_M_Leitzell@cmu.edu (Harry M. Leitzell), security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BPF on in 3.3-RC GENERIC kernel In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 18 Sep 1999 22:51:14 PDT." <199909190551.WAA68627@apollo.backplane.com> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 1999 08:27:18 +0200 Message-ID: <14489.937722438@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org In message <199909190551.WAA68627@apollo.backplane.com>, Matthew Dillon writes: > It is especially important that system calls be constructed with > future binary compatibility issues in mind, especially if they > become widely adopted. You have not proved or even shown that changing this particular element will be enough to guarantee that we can support other protocols in the future. The only thing that can be done to the jail(2) syscall to improve it in that respect is to add a version number as the first element, I would have no problem with that. -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message