> From: Horst von Brand [mailto:vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl]
> Subject: Re: PUBLIC CHALLENGE: (was RE: devfs again, (was RE: USB device
> alloc ation) )
>
> >BTW,
> >the entries there allow you to mount _iff_ you have permissions on the
> >devices themselves. The permission bits are the systems' last (only?) line
> >of defense against miscreants; permissions of devices are extremely
> >critical, much more so than even the most critical normal files. Fooling
> >around with this if there is no *extremely* good reason is out. Needless to
> >say, I've seen only rather weak reasons for some scheme like devfs.
>
> So why not simply let the driver decide upon it's nodes' permissions?
Because I want user joe to own /dev/fd0?
> >> The use of a config file to determine permissions/ownership is not
> foreign
> >> to the kernel or filesystems.
>
> >Name one use of configuration files for local permissions/ownership on
> >Unix/Linux.
>
> This is a straw man argument. You take an easy target, knock it down,
> and it really doesn't mean anything, but you claim victory. Shame.
Having to have a configuration file for permissions is not a good
thing. Permissions go with files, they don't go in a config file somewhere.
Stephen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/