Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 17 Jun 1999 12:29:57 -0700
From:      "Richard Childers" <rchilders@hamquist.com>
To:        "Paul Hart" <hart@iserver.com>
Cc:        <security@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: some nice advice....
Message-ID:  <37694CB5.9619C283@hamquist.com>
References:  <Pine.BSF.3.96.990617122502.674B-100000@anchovy.orem.iserver.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Paul Hart suggests:

"I might be wrong, but with the advent of sophisticated virtual memory
 systems, aren't sticky bits on executables essentially ignored these
days?
 I thought that good VM systems made sticky bits on executables
basically
 useless now."


I wonder the same question; this was an idea I came up with a few years
ago,
but I see that BSD 4.4 introduced a few new things that, frankly, I am
only
beginning to hear about now.

(For example, chflags(2).)


-- richard



Paul Hart wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 17 Jun 1999, Richard Childers wrote:
> 
> > I have speculated about building a system with a vast amount of RAM,
> > setting the sticky bit on selected executables to make them
> > memory-resident,
> 
> I might be wrong, but with the advent of sophisticated virtual memory
> systems, aren't sticky bits on executables essentially ignored these days?
> I thought that good VM systems made sticky bits on executables basically
> useless now.
> 
> Paul Hart
> 
> --
> Paul Robert Hart        ><8>  ><8>  ><8>        Verio Web Hosting, Inc.
> hart@iserver.com        ><8>  ><8>  ><8>        http://www.iserver.com/
> 
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message



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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?37694CB5.9619C283>