Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2002 09:41:31 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Garrett Wollman <wollman@lcs.mit.edu>, "M. Warner Losh" <imp@village.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_descrip.c kern_exec.c src/sys/sys filedesc.h Message-ID: <20020419164131.GG38320@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1020419103914.64976x-100000@fledge.watson.org> References: <200204190420.g3J4KMC69617@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1020419103914.64976x-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> [020419 07:41] wrote: > > The policy decision regarding whether a program is "privileged" still has > to be made in the kernel, regardless of whether the fd problem is > addressed in kernel or user space. We discussed the "don't return 0 1 and > 2" fd's, but apparently many programs specifically rely on 0 1 and 2 being > returned sequentially, and that is written into some spec or another. I > think this solution is a reasonable one -- many of the other "easy" > solutions more explicitly violate the specs than this one, as far as I can > tell. Maybe I'm forgetting, but what's wrong with just failing the exec(2)? -- -Alfred Perlstein [alfred@freebsd.org] 'Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology," start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.' Tax deductible donations for FreeBSD: http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020419164131.GG38320>