On Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 11:47:41AM +0200, David Weinehall wrote:
> > Thus, "Hoping for security" is meaningless.
> > But "Hoping for more security by having more PID's" is quite
> > reasonable. If I am local user on your system then I can break in
> > using a wraparound. If that takes 2147483647 processes I have to
> > wait longer than when that takes 32000 processes.
>
> Please, I'm with you on this one, not against you. I want pid_t to be
> increased. I'd rather see it sooner than later.
Good.
> What I meant was simply that _purely_ making the move out of security
> reasons might not be reasonable.
So it is only here we disagree.
Andries
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Oct 07 2000 - 21:00:09 EST