From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 10:57:43 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 10:57:42 -0500 Received: from crack.them.org ([65.125.64.184]:21254 "EHLO crack.them.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 7 Nov 2002 10:57:42 -0500 Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 11:05:21 -0500 From: Daniel Jacobowitz To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Why are exe, cwd, and root priviledged bits of information? Message-ID: <20021107160521.GA18270@nevyn.them.org> Mail-Followup-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 10:57:06AM -0500, Calin A. Culianu wrote: > > In the /prod/PID subset of procfs, why are the exe, cwd, and root symlinks > considered priviledged information? > > Exe is the big one for me, as this one can be usually infered from reading > /prod/PID/maps. Root I guess can't be inferred in any unpriviledged way, > and neither can cwd. At any rate.. I am not sure behind the philosophy to > make these symlinks' destinations priviledged... can someone clarify > this? This came up a little while ago. The answer is that maps should be priviledged also. For instance: You can protect a directory by giving its parent directory no read permissions. The name of the directory is now secret. You don't want to reveal it in cwd. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer