From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Aug 24 19:55:35 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from icicle.winternet.com (icicle.winternet.com [198.174.169.13])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9026152AD
	for <hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Tue, 24 Aug 1999 19:54:57 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from nrahlstr@mail.winternet.com)
Received: from tundra.winternet.com (nrahlstr@tundra.winternet.com [198.174.169.11])
	by icicle.winternet.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA16150;
	Tue, 24 Aug 1999 21:53:04 -0500 (CDT)
        SMTP "HELO" (ESMTP) greeting from tundra.winternet.com
        But _really_ from :: nrahlstr@tundra.winternet.com [198.174.169.11]
        SMTP "MAIL From" = nrahlstr@mail.winternet.com (Nathan Ahlstrom)
        SMTP "RCPT To" = 
Received: (from nrahlstr@localhost)
          by tundra.winternet.com (8.8.7/8.8.4)
	  id VAA18658; Tue, 24 Aug 1999 21:53:03 -0500 (CDT)
Message-ID: <19990824215302.A18654@winternet.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 21:53:02 -0500
From: Nathan Ahlstrom <nrahlstr@winternet.com>
To: Bill Fumerola <billf@jade.chc-chimes.com>, Ryan <ryan@ryan.org>
Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Are certain parts of kernel not using suser() when they should?
Mail-Followup-To: Bill Fumerola <billf@jade.chc-chimes.com>,
	Ryan <ryan@ryan.org>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.990824172943.3756A-100000@ryan.org> <Pine.BSF.4.10.9908241950010.14447-100000@jade.chc-chimes.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9908241950010.14447-100000@jade.chc-chimes.com>; from Bill Fumerola on Tue, Aug 24, 1999 at 07:51:36PM -0400
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

Bill Fumerola <billf@jade.chc-chimes.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Aug 1999, Ryan wrote:
> 
> > Grepping through the kernel source tree, one finds these 12 files that use
> > "uid == 0" checks instead of the usual suser(). There may be more than one
> > instance per function/macro:
> [...]
> > Is there a reason for these checks not to use suser?
> 
> No. Eivind Eklund was working this according the FreeBSD projects
> page (eivind@FreeBSD.org). I don't know the implication of this,
> would this impact phk's jail routines?

There are some prelimiary patches for this on my web page.
http://www.freebsd.org/~nrahlstr/suser.patch

I had been working with Eivind on it, but I have not had time as of late.
The patch that is there should be close to commit ready modulo a decsion
to use suser vs. suser_xxx.

If anyone is interested in committing this patch, I can work with
them/clean it up if necessary.

Thanks!
Nathan

-- 
Nathan Ahlstrom                        FreeBSD: http://www.FreeBSD.org/
nrahlstr@winternet.com                 PGP Key ID: 0x67BC9D19


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