From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 15 15:40:54 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D29D16A4CE for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 15:40:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 751A043D97 for ; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 15:40:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fledge.watson.org (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i0FNcJUd078814; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 18:38:19 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from localhost (robert@localhost)i0FNcIm7078811; Thu, 15 Jan 2004 18:38:18 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 18:38:18 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Damian Gerow In-Reply-To: <20040115213447.GA40114@afflictions.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problems with net/net-snmp on 5.2-RELEASE? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 23:40:54 -0000 On Thu, 15 Jan 2004, Damian Gerow wrote: > Thus spake Damian Gerow (freebsd@coal.sentex.ca) [15/01/04 13:51]: > : I'm having troubles getting net/net-snmp working on 5.2-RELEASE -- I've > : tried both 5.1 and 5.0.9, and both are exhibiting the same behaviour. This > : is with 5.0.9 (communities changed to protect the innocent): > > Whoops. Found the problem -- the default install of 5.2 doesn't appear > to mount /proc by default. Mounted, problem (mostly) fixed. Still have > some permission issues, but those I can handle. Hmm. Do you have any idea why the SNMP agent needs access to procfs? We've been trying to deprecate use of procfs due to long-standing security issues with the procfs approach (just look at the vulnerability lists for FreeBSD, Linux, and Solaris to see why...) There are some services in procfs not found using the other interfaces, but frequently applications can get access to everything they need using either libkvm (which uses sysctl()), or using ptrace(). Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Senior Research Scientist, McAfee Research