Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 6 May 2002 14:06:47 +0200
From:      Jean-Yves Lefort <jylefort@brutele.be>
To:        default <default013subscriptions@hotmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Quick Question Regarding PS
Message-ID:  <20020506140647.B90622@jsite.lefort.net>
In-Reply-To: <OE30yyWrX4qrvAsp4Xg0000219d@hotmail.com>; from default013subscriptions@hotmail.com on Sun, May 05, 2002 at 10:11:17PM -0500
References:  <OE31t4I9pTl4EnAv1Og000020b2@hotmail.com> <20020506032521.A26795@jsite.lefort.net> <OE30yyWrX4qrvAsp4Xg0000219d@hotmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 10:11:17PM -0500, default wrote:
> Thank you for your help, but the man page actually doesn't say anything
> about this. The line you refer to mentions that procfs should be mounted
> when running ps, not that ps is necessary for procfs to work properly, which
> would be the kind of problem that I am looking for. (In other words I'm
> looking for applications that are dependant on ps to be there, not things
> that ps is dependant on.)

You wanted to know if you can disallow your users to see other users
processes by replacing the ps command with a homemade script.

It seems easy to understand that even if you replace the ps command by
a shell script only echoing

	"We have joy, we have fun, we have rootshell on a Sun!"

your users will still be able to gather informations about the processes
running on your system, simply by browsing the procfs filesystem, usually
mounted in /proc.

> Maybe I'll just have a perl script designed. Thanks for you help.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jean-Yves Lefort" <jylefort@brutele.be>
> To: "FreeBSD-Questions" <freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
> Cc: "default" <default013subscriptions@hotmail.com>
> Sent: Sunday, May 05, 2002 8:25 PM
> Subject: Re: Quick Question Regarding PS
> 
> 
> > On Sun, May 05, 2002 at 08:02:58PM -0500, default wrote:
> > > Hi, I'm running on FreeBSD 4.1 which doesn't have the sysctl option
> > > (showallprocs) ... I am trying to think of a good way to let my users
> only
> > > see their own processes, and I am not much of a programmer...
> > >
> > > I was thinking of making a bash script that would do ps only showing the
> > > user's processes, replacing the ps command with that, and changing ps's
> name
> > > to something that no one would think of...
> > >
> > > but... before I do... I was wondering, are there any system resources
> that
> > > use PS? ... anything I should be worried about in this scenario?
> >
> > I really don't like to flame (or maybe I do like it, sometimes), but:
> >
> > 1) I searched really hard, but I couldn't find your name in the message.
> >
> > 2) From the ps(1) manual page:
> >
> > "The process file system (see procfs(5)) should be mounted
> > when ps is executed, otherwise not all information will be
> > available."
> >
> >    Maybe you could read the appropriate manpage before increasing
> >    the volume of this list?
> >
> > > Thanks much
> >
> > You are welcome.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Jean-Yves Lefort
> >
> > --
> > * Jean-Yves Lefort -- jylefort@brutele.be -- http://lefort.homeunix.org/ *
> >
> > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
> >

Regards,

Jean-Yves Lefort

-- 
* Jean-Yves Lefort -- jylefort@brutele.be -- http://lefort.homeunix.org/ *

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020506140647.B90622>