lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Mar]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 5/5] ptrace: it is fun to strace /sbin/init
On 03/21, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> On Thu 2008-03-20 19:57:56, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > On 03/20, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > >
> > > > Ptracing of /sbin/init is not allowed. Of course, this is very dangerous, but
> > > > may be useful. Introduce the kernel boot parameter to allow this.
> > > ...
> > > > @@ -803,6 +803,8 @@ and is between 256 and 4096 characters.
> > > > Run specified binary instead of /sbin/init as init
> > > > process.
> > > >
> > > > + init_ptrace [KNL] Allows to ptrace init. Very dangerous. Don't use.
> > > > +
> > >
> > > I don't know what ptracing init is good for, and I believe people
> > > wanting to do this kind of special stuff can patch their own kernel...
> >
> > Yes sure. But could you explain why this can be bad given that ptracing
> > init needs the explicit boot parameter? IOW, could you explain why you
> > don't like this small and trivial change which adds a minimal impact?
>
> "It can't be bad, its optional".
>
> It is bad exactly _because_ it is optional. Anything that adds boot
> parameter is *not* trivial...

You are right. I'd prefer to make /sbin/init ptraceable unconditionally,
the root should know what it does. But this will change the historical
behaviour.

> Why not add
>
> please_randomly_corrupt_memory boot parameter? It may be useful for
> something...
> Pavel

Nice argument.

Oleg.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-03-21 02:19    [W:0.030 / U:0.248 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site