Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 25 Nov 2018 12:47:32 -0700 | From | Jonathan Corbet <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Documentation/admin-guide: introduce perf-security.rst file |
| |
On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 12:14:14 +0300 Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> +For the purpose of performing security checks Linux implementation splits > +processes into two categories [6]_ : a) privileged processes (whose effective > +user ID is 0, referred to as superuser or root), and b) unprivileged processes > +(whose effective UID is nonzero).
Is that really what's going on here? If I understand things correctly, it's looking for CAP_SYS_PTRACE rather than a specific UID; am I missing something here?
(Also, you would want "*the* Linux implementation" in the first sentence above).
One other thing:
> +(whose effective UID is nonzero). Privileged processes bypass all kernel > +security permission checks so perf_events performance monitoring is fully > +available to privileged processes without *access*, *scope* and *resource* > +restrictions.
Could I ask for a slight toning down of the markup here? There's a lot of *emphasis* here that isn't really needed and tends to get in the way.
Thanks,
jon
| |