lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Nov]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Further shmctl() SHM_LOCK strangeness
    On Wed, 24 Nov 2004, Hugh Dickins wrote:

    >> regardles of the segment's ownership or permissions,
    >> providing the size of the segment falls within the
    >> process's RLIMIT_MEMLOCK limit.

    > Offhand I find it hard to grasp whether it's harmless or bad,
    > but inclined to think bad - if there happen to be lots of small
    > enough shared memory segments on the system, a series of processes
    > run by one unprivileged user can lock down lots of memory?

    Mlocking and munlocking of shm segments is accounted
    against the user_struct, not against the process.

    This should stop any malicious exploits.

    --
    "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
    Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
    by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 14:08    [W:2.643 / U:0.012 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site