[tahoe-dev] Fwd: [cap-talk] Don't put capabilities in argv?

[Aleksandr Milewski]

A pragmatic $0.02.

We should allow a mechanism to keep caps off the commandline. We  
should also allow them, because they're convenient and the process  
table leak is not always a concern.

If we do allow caps on the commandline, we should rewrite argv to  
reduce the window where the leak occurs.

I admit that I'm biased by the fact that I *really* want #174 fixed.

-Zandr


On Jul 12, 2008, at 8:53 PM, Ben Laurie wrote:

> Ben Hyde wrote:
>> On Jul 12, 2008, at 6:00 PM, zooko wrote:
>>> Argh
>>
>>>> From: Kevin Reid <kpreid at mac.com>
>>>>
>>
>>>> unix systems reveal command-line arguments of all
>>>> processes to all users.
>>
>> The usual work around is to overwrite your argv.  In fact some people
>> enjoy
>> displaying process status that way. <http://cr.yp.to/daemontools/readproctitle.html
>
> AIUI, that doesn't work on all OSes.
>
> -- 
> http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html           http://www.links.org/
>
> "There is no limit to what a man can do or how far he can go if he
> doesn't mind who gets the credit." - Robert Woodruff
> _______________________________________________
> tahoe-dev mailing list
> tahoe-dev at allmydata.org
> http://allmydata.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev