From owner-freebsd-current Tue Nov 16 1:19:18 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.40.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 343C4151D0 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 1999 01:19:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.9.3/8.9.2) with ESMTP id KAA24361; Tue, 16 Nov 1999 10:17:44 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from phk@critter.freebsd.dk) To: Sheldon Hearn Cc: Matthew Dillon , current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PATCH for testing In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 16 Nov 1999 11:14:02 +0200." <45617.942743642@axl.noc.iafrica.com> Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 10:17:44 +0100 Message-ID: <24359.942743864@critter.freebsd.dk> From: Poul-Henning Kamp Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <45617.942743642@axl.noc.iafrica.com>, Sheldon Hearn writes: > > >On Tue, 16 Nov 1999 07:19:52 +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > >> > Why don't we get rid of the 'e' option to ps while we are at it >> > considering how much of a security hole it is. >> >> Hmm, well, I like to have it around for root at least... > >Exactly. > >In a perfect world, the -e option will only allow inspection of the >environment of processes for which the owner of the ps process has >sufficient priveledge. Yes that makes sense, because if all comes to all they could attach a debugger and find it that way anyway. -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message