Re: [PATCH] [request for inclusion] Realtime LSM
From: Matt Mackall
Date: Tue Mar 08 2005 - 01:39:16 EST
On Mon, Mar 07, 2005 at 11:30:57PM -0600, Jack O'Quin wrote:
> Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> > Matt Mackall <mpm@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> I think Chris Wright's last rlimit patch is more sensible and ready to
> >> go.
> > I must say that I like rlimits - very straightforward, although somewhat
> > awkward to use from userspace due to shortsighted shell design.
> > Does anyone have serious objections to this approach?
> 1. is likely to introduce multiuser system security holes like the one
> created recently when the mlock() rlimits bug was fixed (DoS attacks)
I wouldn't say "likely". But anything's possible, so I wouldn't rule
it out entirely.
> 2. requires updates to all the shells
Requires update to the PAM distro for our purposes.
> 3. forces Windows and Mac musicians to learn and understand PAM
Or for the distro (ubuntu or whatever) to catch up. The alternative is
for the user to compile their own kernel module and mess with its
> 4. is undocumented and has never been tested in any real music studios
Well you'll have a bit to test it before it goes to Linus.
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/