On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 08:20:30PM +0100, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote: > Thor Lancelot Simon <t...@panix.com> wrote: > > > The point is, this is interesting functionality that makes something > > new possible that is potentially useful from a security point of view, > > but the new thing that's possible also breaks assumptions that existing > > code may rely on to get security guarantees it wants. > > Well, it is standard mandated and we want to be standard compliant. If > it is a security hazard, we can have a sysctl to disable the system > call. Something like > sysctl -w kern.fexecve = 0 and it would return ENOSYS.
Frankly, I still don't see the point why something would want to use it. Joerg
