On Tue, 16.11.10 23:04, Alan Cox (al...@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk) wrote:

How would that work? Not giving a user ownership of the tty device? That would break like about every second program. It's too late for this.

And anyway unless the kernel is patched you can even see who is running which process on the system. And now you become all nervous about telling people which tty is currently in the fg? Seriously?

Security is a fog granade here. It's a non-issue.

Also, afaics the current ioctl() interface you love so much works on any tty and gives you that information anyway, right? Some tty fd should be accessible by about every process and VT_GETSTATE on that and you have the same information -- and no further perm checking is done at all! So isn't Kay's approach much nicer, where you can actually protect this oh-so-precious information in a much tighter fashion thatn with normal ioctls!

Lennart