From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Nov 6 22:52: 7 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from rover.village.org (rover.village.org [204.144.255.49]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB53A14C33; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 22:52:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Received: from harmony.village.org (harmony.village.org [10.0.0.6]) by rover.village.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA84320; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 23:52:03 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org) Received: from harmony.village.org (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.village.org (8.9.3/8.8.3) with ESMTP id XAA03143; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 23:51:05 -0700 (MST) Message-Id: <199911070651.XAA03143@harmony.village.org> To: Brian Fundakowski Feldman Subject: Re: Procfs' pointers to files. Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 06 Nov 1999 15:54:50 EST." References: Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 23:51:05 -0700 From: Warner Losh Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message Brian Fundakowski Feldman writes: : It sounds to me that what you really want are the semantics of a : symbolic link and not the semantics of a hard link. Is it just me, : or does it seem as if the pathname of the executable being stored as : a virtual symlink in procfs as "file" would solve these security : problems? If you can get to the full path to the original file, this is likely the answer. I don't know if that information is easily available or not. My memory of the proc structure is that it has a vnode to the executable, which is easy to produce as an alias in /proc/xxx/file, but much harder to get the original path to. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message