Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 20 Jul 1999 21:44:25 +0200 | From | Matthew Wilcox <> | Subject | Re: Patch: CLONE_PPID (was kernel thread support - LWP's) |
| |
On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 06:43:37PM -0500, Tim Hockin wrote: > Here is the first patch I threw together for CLONE_PPID support. This is > against 2.2.10. > > Concept: a child should be able to create siblings (children of its > parent) if the parent lets it. > > clone() now has two new flags: > CLONE_PPIDOK : resulting child may create siblings > CLONE_PPID : resulting child should be a sibling > > PF_FLAGS has a new entry PF_PPIDOK, which is set by CLONE_PPIDOK
Why do we need PPIDOK? What's the issue that I'm overlooking which makes it matter if a child can create siblings without the parent's okay? (lets ignore moral issues here and concentrate on security ones :-)
If there is a security issue here which I've overlooked, do we need a mechanism for clearing the PPIDOK flag? Perhaps on exec()?
-- Matthew Wilcox <willy@bofh.ai> "Windows and MacOS are products, contrived by engineers in the service of specific companies. Unix, by contrast, is not so much a product as it is a painstakingly compiled oral history of the hacker subculture." - N Stephenson
- 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/
| |