From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk
Cc: hch@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
olaf+list.linux-kernel@olafdietsche.de
Subject: Re: procfs permissions on 2.6.x
Date: Sun, 4 Jul 2004 15:43:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040704154303.4eb0fbaf.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040704221302.GW12308@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk>
viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 04, 2004 at 02:55:42PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> >
> > Some do. On my test box 1000-odd /proc inodes get allocated and fully
> > freed on each `ls -R /proc'. 65 /proc inodes are freed during `ls -lR
> > /proc/net'. So maybe it isn't working completely.
> >
> > But proc_notify_change() copies the inode's uid, gid and mode into the
> > proc_dir_entry, so they get correctly initialised when the inode is
> > reinstantiated, so afaict we have no bug here.
>
> Why on the earth do we ever want to allow chown/chmod on procfs in the first
> place?
We always have done, even current 2.4 permits it. But the changes go away
when the /proc file is closed.
> Al, who'd missed that stuff back in 2.5.42, but would love to hear explanation
> anyway.
That change made the chown/chgrp/chmod changes persist after the file is
closed, which seems sensible.
The alternative would be to disallow these changes altogether. That might
break something, but it seems doubtful.
As for why anyone would _want_ to change these things: no idea.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-07-04 22:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-07-03 20:22 procfs permissions on 2.6.x Herbert Poetzl
2004-07-03 20:25 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-07-03 20:35 ` Andrew Morton
2004-07-03 21:04 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-07-03 21:35 ` Andrew Morton
2004-07-04 21:35 ` viro
2004-07-04 21:55 ` Andrew Morton
2004-07-04 22:13 ` viro
2004-07-04 22:43 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2004-07-06 3:31 ` Andy Lutomirski
2004-07-05 1:50 ` Clemens Schwaighofer
2004-07-05 1:55 ` viro
2004-07-05 8:05 ` Duncan Sands
2004-07-05 8:14 ` Clemens Schwaighofer
2004-07-04 1:27 ` bert hubert
[not found] <2dZjc-7BP-15@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <2dZjf-7BP-27@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <2dZsQ-7GF-23@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <2dZVV-867-33@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <2e0oZ-8lm-35@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <2emSs-6R8-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <2enbS-72q-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <2env9-7li-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
2004-07-04 22:25 ` Andi Kleen
2004-07-04 22:37 ` FabF
2004-07-04 23:30 ` Paul Jackson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040704154303.4eb0fbaf.akpm@osdl.org \
--to=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olaf+list.linux-kernel@olafdietsche.de \
--cc=viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox