Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 00:09:06 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> To: Mike Smith <msmith@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/crypto/openssh sshd.c Message-ID: <200007050609.AAA37799@harmony.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 04 Jul 2000 23:14:14 PDT." <200007050614.XAA08241@mass.osd.bsdi.com> References: <200007050614.XAA08241@mass.osd.bsdi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <200007050614.XAA08241@mass.osd.bsdi.com> Mike Smith writes: : > In message <200007042117.OAA05458@mass.osd.bsdi.com> Mike Smith writes: : > : > I have a continuing strong objection to the presence : > : > of "file" in /proc in the first place, as I don't feel it substantially : > : > contributes to useful functionality in /proc. : > : : > : ?? That's nonsense. It provides a useful piece of information (the image : > : file backing a process' text/data) that is not available anywhere else. : > : > Except it is a security hole when it was the vnode... I like file : > being there since it makes gcore work again :-) : : I think it's pretty clear that the feature needs to be secure, however : now that it is, I can't see any reason for deprecating it. I was agreeing with you that files is almost required in procfs and much much harder to obtain via other methods. It is used by gcore, for example. It shouldn't be abused to do something like exec, but doing so won't hurt since the path is as secure as the original file and directory were. I agree it shouldn't be depricated. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200007050609.AAA37799>