lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jun]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] perf tools: Fixup for removing -f option in perf record

    * David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com> wrote:

    > On 6/28/13 9:37 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > >
    > >* David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com> wrote:
    > >
    > >>On 6/28/13 3:47 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
    > >>>>>I thought -f was the implied default for ages?
    > >>>>
    > >>>>OK.. I've been dutifully typing it all this while :-)
    > >>>
    > >>>The '-f' option in record command had no affect.. myabe it got
    > >>>depreceated when we started to backup perf.data to perf.data.old..?
    > >>
    > >>Way back in 2010, 2.6.34 kernel - 7865e817 commit. I've been typing
    > >>the -f for while too. Now about the need for the pesky -f on the
    > >>analysis side....
    > >
    > >That's only needed when perf.data is owned by a different user, right?
    > >
    >
    > Yes, why not let file permissions dictate of uid x can read uid y files?
    > Why does perf need to have that restriction? For example, QA collects
    > the data files, developers analyze them.

    So, the thinking behind that is that user should not be able to
    generate a malicious perf.data file and let root (or another user)
    run it accidentally.

    ( That presumes some sort of exploitable parsing bug or other buffer
    overflow in perf. )

    I don't feel terribly strongly about it though.

    Thanks,

    Ingo


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2013-06-28 18:41    [W:2.268 / U:0.076 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site