[sugar] [RFC] teach sugar to update oom_adj

[Marco Pesenti Gritti]

On Wed, 2007-02-21 at 15:24 +0530, Joshua N Pritikin wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 10:38:49AM +0100, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-02-21 at 14:58 +0530, Joshua N Pritikin wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 20, 2007 at 05:15:19PM +0100, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 2007-02-20 at 21:28 +0530, Joshua N Pritikin wrote:
> > > > > On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 01:51:07PM +0100, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
> > > > > > Is /proc/pid/oom_adj supposed to be user writable?
> > > > > 
> > > > > It needs capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE). Is OLPC going to employ SELinux or 
> > > > > somesuch for Bitfrost? If not then some kind of mini-server running as 
> > > > > root will be needed to traverse the security barrier.
> > > > 
> > > > We already have that (hardwaremanager on dev.laptop.org).
> > > 
> > > Can any process connect to hardwaremanager? If so, then oom_adj needs 
> > > to be somewhere else. A malicious process could set oom_adj such that 
> > > the next process to die is sugar. Only sugar should have access to set 
> > > oom_adj.
> > 
> > Currently any process can connect, but only sugar really needs to. I
> > don't see problem with limiting access.
> 
> Oh, can dbus really limit access?

You will have to ask to Ivan or John. I'm assuming we will have the same
issue to limit access to some of the data store methods (well, if we
ever move to dbus for the data store).

Marco