Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds
Alan Cox (alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Tue, 4 Aug 1998 18:36:29 +0100 (BST)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Zachary Amsden: "Re: core dumps when uid has been changed since exec"
- Previous message: Alexander Kjeldaas: "Re: CIPE - Encrypted IP Encapsulation"
- In reply to: David S. Miller: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
- Next in thread: Martin Mares: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
- Next in thread: Jon Lewis: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
- Reply: Martin Mares: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
- Reply: Theodore Y. Ts'o: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
> True.
>
> However I still contend that this is an ass-backwards way to fix
> bugs in software.
Security patches aren't intended to fix bugs in software. They are a
recogntion of the fact that nobody has mastered the art of writing highly
secure software.
Some of them also do things you can't do as a generic case - stuff like TPE
requires kernel help
-
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.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
- Next message: Zachary Amsden: "Re: core dumps when uid has been changed since exec"
- Previous message: Alexander Kjeldaas: "Re: CIPE - Encrypted IP Encapsulation"
- In reply to: David S. Miller: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
- Next in thread: Martin Mares: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
- Next in thread: Jon Lewis: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
- Reply: Martin Mares: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"
- Reply: Theodore Y. Ts'o: "Re: [PATCH] [SECURITY] suid procs exec'd with bad 0,1,2 fds"