From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759910Ab2C2SUv (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:20:51 -0400 Received: from am1ehsobe004.messaging.microsoft.com ([213.199.154.207]:20651 "EHLO am1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759229Ab2C2SUo (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Mar 2012 14:20:44 -0400 X-SpamScore: -11 X-BigFish: VPS-11(zzbb2dI9371I1432N98dKzz1202hzzz2fh668h839hd25h) X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:160.33.98.74;KIP:(null);UIP:(null);IPV:NLI;H:mail7.fw-bc.sony.com;RD:mail7.fw-bc.sony.com;EFVD:NLI Message-ID: <4F74A7E1.3010500@am.sony.com> Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 11:20:17 -0700 From: Tim Bird User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.28) Gecko/20120306 Thunderbird/3.1.20 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel Walker CC: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "kernel-team@android.com" Subject: Re: [RFC] Android Logger vs. Shared Memory FIGHT! References: <20120328210631.GB2297@fifo99.com> <20120329145055.GE13912@fifo99.com> <4F748CF6.4010205@am.sony.com> <20120329175209.GE16476@fifo99.com> In-Reply-To: <20120329175209.GE16476@fifo99.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginatorOrg: am.sony.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 3/29/2012 10:52 AM, Daniel Walker wrote: > On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 09:25:26AM -0700, Tim Bird wrote: >> At the moment, I'm not considering an alternative for logger that runs >> completely in user-space. Having said that, this test is certainly interesting, >> and may provide some performance numbers for logger or alternatives that would >> be useful to compare. > > I was just thinking what does an accurate PID actually get you? If you > looking at some logs with a PID of 20048, does that mean something to > you? It doesn't actually mean much because you can't map that back to > anything. If you have the device, and the process is still running then > you could look it up .. > > So lets say logger was modified to record comm values.. That way you > could record the actual process name AND the pid. Well if you use > prctl(PR_SET_NAME), you can forge comm values. So that doesn't get you > much either.. > > So even if you record accurate PID values, it doesn't mean anything > anyway. Putting bogus pids in the log would allow a log DDOS-er to hide their activity more easily. But with the log in user-space, there are much more insidious things that could be done to hide or corrupt log activity. So the sensitivity of this particular piece of log data is not that great. -- Tim