Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2011 21:31:18 +0400
From: Vasiliy Kulikov <>
Subject: Re: 32/64 bitness restriction for pid namespace


On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 20:55 +0400, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote:
> Some thoughts about prctl() approach.

Also, to keep the code clean and small, I think sysctl interface should
be dropped.  The only use case is locking a live container, which is
probably a very limited thing.  Also it will fail if any unprivileged task
already runs a binary of other bitness anyway.

Do you agree?


Vasiliy Kulikov - bringing security into open computing environments

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.