Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!ucsfcgl!cca.ucsf.edu!root From: root@cca.ucsf.edu (Systems Staff) Newsgroups: comp.os.minix Subject: Re: New fs/protect.c that allows mortals to chown() Summary: The sticky bit is not that powerful Message-ID: <2574@ucsfcca.ucsf.edu> Date: 16 Nov 89 02:40:35 GMT References: <707.255F764F@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us> Organization: Computer Center, UCSF Lines: 32 In article <707.255F764F@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us>, mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst) writes: > > Sticky really isn't a problem, for two reasons. (1) The meaning of > the sticky bit is "Never swap this out, EVER. Also, keep it in core ^------------------------------------------------- > all the time, even when it's not being run." I suppose it's possible ------------------------------------------^ This is not true of any version of Unix I have seen (even V6 and PWB). All it says is keep the swap space image; its use is restricted to the superusers and applies only to programs which can be re-executed from the swap image (for some systems this is all of them). Your observation (2) below is therefore the correct behaviour. > for a person to make the system unusable, especially on a 640K system, > by making something like Elle sticky, and then loading it, but there's > really no way to prevent this. (2) Since MINIX doesn't have swapping, > the sticky bit doesn't do anything there. Thos Sumner Internet: thos@cca.ucsf.edu (The I.G.) UUCP: ...ucbvax!ucsfcgl!cca.ucsf!thos BITNET: thos@ucsfcca U.S. Mail: Thos Sumner, Computer Center, Rm U-76, UCSF San Francisco, CA 94143-0704 USA I hear nothing in life is certain but death and taxes -- and they're working on death. #include