Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2004 10:53:30 -0400 From: "Brian F. Feldman" <green@freebsd.org> To: dodell@sitetronics.com Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [patch] lockf(3) user-exploitable kernel panic Message-ID: <200404151453.i3FErUVY005892@green.homeunix.org> In-Reply-To: Message from "dodell@sitetronics.com" <dodell@sitetronics.com> <99610-220044415124312827@M2W057.mail2web.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"dodell@sitetronics.com" <dodell@sitetronics.com> wrote: > >> sh has been fixed. I was under the impression that csh used libutil for > >> this (libutil has been fixed). I'll take a deeper look into shells in > >> base and in ports and figure out what changes I need to make there. > >> While I'm at it, I don't think it'd be a bad idea to go ahead and build > >> in the RLIMIT_SBSIZE to bash and bash2. > > > >If it is easy, it might be worthwhile to patch the shells to use > >libutil and submit those patches back to the maintainers. > > There are a huge number of shells to do this with. This subsystem > looks like somewhat of a kludge to me in this respect; the > functionality is plainly provided in libutil, while every shell (sh > and tcsh included) have their own implementations. limits(1) > even has statically compiled information about the limits for > every shell it is aware of (including sh, csh, tcsh, bash/bash2 > and a good few others). I'll take a look at these later. Thanks for doing this work, Devon! The most important part is for /etc/login.conf to allow you to configure the maximum limits -- all the shell stuff is really secondary. -- Brian Fundakowski Feldman \'[ FreeBSD ]''''''''''\ <> green@FreeBSD.org \ The Power to Serve! \ Opinions expressed are my own. \,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,\
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200404151453.i3FErUVY005892>