Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 21:14:09 +0100 (MET)
From: "Michael Kerrisk" <mtk-lkml@gmx.net>
To: manfred@colorfullife.com, hugh@veritas.com
Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, michael.kerrisk@gmx.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20041123090449.1672494f.akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Further shmctl() SHM_LOCK strangeness
Message-ID: <7379.1101327249@www30.gmx.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1006
Lines: 32

Manfred, Hugh,

While studying the RLIMIT_MEMLOCK stuff further, I came 
up with another observation: a process can perform a
shmctl(SHM_LOCK) on *any* System V shared memory segment, 
regardles of the segment's ownership or permissions,
providing the size of the segment falls within the 
process's RLIMIT_MEMLOCK limit.

Is this intended behaviour?  For most other System V IPC 
"ctl" operations the process must either:

1. be the owner of the object or have an appropriate 
   capability, or

2. have suitable permissions on the object.

Which of these two conditions applies depends on the
"ctl" operation.

Cheers,

Michael

-- 
NEU +++ DSL Komplett von GMX +++ http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
GMX DSL-Netzanschluss + Tarif zum superg?nstigen Komplett-Preis!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/