1 |
On 3/9/22 11:50 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: |
2 |
> This is normal, at least when using systemd. |
3 |
|
4 |
How is this a /systemd/ thing? |
5 |
|
6 |
Is it because systemd is enabling a /kernel/ thing that probably is |
7 |
otherwise un(der)used? |
8 |
|
9 |
I ask as someone who disliked systemd as many others do. But I fail to |
10 |
see how this is systemd's fault. |
11 |
|
12 |
> To disable this behavior, you have to set: |
13 |
> |
14 |
> sysctl fs.protected_regular=0 |
15 |
> |
16 |
> But you should know what this means when it comes to security. See: |
17 |
> |
18 |
> https://www.spinics.net/lists/fedora-devel/msg252452.html |
19 |
|
20 |
I read that message, but no messages linked therefrom, and don't see any |
21 |
security gotchas about disabling (setting to 0) fs.protected_* |
22 |
|
23 |
I see some value in a tunable to protect against writing to files of |
24 |
different type in the guise of protecting against writing somewhere that |
25 |
you probably want to not write. Sort of like shell redirection ">" |
26 |
protection for clobbering existing files where you likely meant to |
27 |
append ">>" to them. |
28 |
|
29 |
But I am ignorant as to how this is a /systemd/ thing. |
30 |
|
31 |
|
32 |
|
33 |
-- |
34 |
Grant. . . . |
35 |
unix || die |