Casper.Dik at Sun.COM wrote:
>> Gary Winiger wrote:
>>
>>>> IMO, this case should be withdrawn and the bug should be fixed.
>>>> If I'm wrong about the bug, then the case should be reintroduced
>>>> with rational as to why there isn't a bug and what the policy really
>>>> should be for TIOCSTI.
>>>>
>>>> I'll give the project team a while to answer this before considering
>>>> further steps, such as withdrawn, waiting need spec or even derail
>>>> for a meeting.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Filed:
>>> P3, 6838249 The TIOCSTI policy appears to require too many privileges
>>>
>>>
>> If we consider TIOCSTI failure with EPERM on devices you own a bug, then
>> this case can probably be withdrawn.
>>
>
>
> Unfortunately, I don't agree.
>
> So what do other OSes do?
>
> I think it's very dangerous to allow TIOCSTI, even if you own the terminal.
>
> (Before, firefox can only run as me, if you change the semantics for
> TIOCSTI, then firefox can run as root if I've su'ed in some window)
>
Only if I invoke it in the su'ed window, which I can already do with or
without pconsole/TIOCSTI.
-Norm
