Re: PIDs limited to 15 significant bits

[Andries Brouwer]

On Sat, Sep 30, 2000 at 08:35:28AM -0500, Jeff Epler wrote:

> 31- or 32-bit PIDs might be a convenience, but they don't furnish
> security against wraparound attacks,  they just make them take
> a little longer to exploit.

Precisely. It takes a factor 60000 longer.

Maybe you think security is a yes/no matter, but then no secure
systems exist. In real life it is a matter of less or more secure.

> vulnerabilities due to PID wrap should just plain get fixed

Yes. Just like all vulnerabilities.

Andries
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/