Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 06:11:09 -0700 From: Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group <Cy.Schubert@uumail.gov.bc.ca> To: netch@lucky.net Cc: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSDDEATH.c.txt (mmap dirty page no check bug) Message-ID: <200006071311.e57DBsW08744@cwsys.cwsent.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 07 Jun 2000 14:44:21 %2B0300." <20000607144421.A82711@lucky.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
n message <20000607144421.A82711@lucky.net>, Valentin Nechayev writes:
> Tue, Jun 06, 2000 at 23:55:03, dillon wrote about "Re: FreeBSDDEATH.c.txt (m
> map dirty page no check bug)":
>
> > Maybe on your system it is, but try running a multi-user system that
> > way and you will quickly find your /var/tmp filled up to the brim. Or,
>
> Of course, of course.
> It is general problem of any public-accessable resource.
> Do you think you can really fix this world? Or do you try to emit /tmp
> as philosophical category?
Agreed. That's why the whole concept of /tmp and /var/tmp is flawed.
In my original reply in this thread I tried to take a broad as view and
conciliatory view as possible to satisfy all points of view and
hopefully have people consider (gently nudge) the idea of the more
secure approach of no /tmp as an option. My orignal tactic obviously
did not work I am now showing my true colours by insisting (like
everyone else does) that /tmp and /var/tmp as we know them be retired,
to be replaced by a paradigm that is more secure. Any less is
invitation for disaster!
Replacement candidates for /tmp and /var/tmp are:
1. Each user has a subdirectory in /tmp as /tmp/$USER. An idea brought
forth to BUGTRAQ by Theo de Raadt of the OpenBSD project.
2. Each user maintains their own /tmp as $HOME/tmp or some such thing.
An idea I had discussed with my co-workers a number of years ago.
>
> > MFS is a terrible idea for /tmp. Each page in an MFS filesystem eats
> > *TWO* pages of physical memory (until swapped). This means that the
>
> It is problem of one broken realization, isn't it?
Compaq back when they were Digital and Sun both claim that their MFS
and TMPFS, respectively, are faster than disk. Agreed, the FreeBSD MFS
implementation is very much broken. I'm not sure whether md
pseudo-devices are stable enough production yet. Anyone on this list
with good or bad experience with the new md pseudo-devices?
Regards, Phone: (250)387-8437
Cy Schubert Fax: (250)387-5766
Team Leader, Sun/DEC Team Internet: Cy.Schubert@osg.gov.bc.ca
Open Systems Group, ITSD, ISTA
Province of BC
I
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200006071311.e57DBsW08744>