<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Parmenides <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mobile.parmenides@gmail.com">mobile.parmenides@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">> This flag PF_SUPERPRI, indicates used superuser privileges and not use<br>
> superuser privileges.<br>
</div>I get it. This is really a misunderstanding. Thanks a lot.<br>
<br>
2011/9/8 rohan puri <<a href="mailto:rohan.puri15@gmail.com">rohan.puri15@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5">> Hi,<br>
><br>
> When forking a child process, the copy_process() function will by<br>
> default clear the PF_SUPERPRIV flag, which indicates whether a process<br>
> use superuser privileges. That means a superuser process will create<br>
> a child process does not has superuser privileges. I think the child<br>
> process of a superuser process should also be a superuser one, while<br>
> the child process of a normal process by default should also be a<br>
> normal one (except that the setuid bit of the child executable is turn<br>
> on). In both cases it is not necessary that the PF_SUPERPRIV flag to<br>
> be cleared. So, I wonder why the PF_SUPERPRIV flag is cleared by<br>
> defult.<br>
><br>
><br>
> Hi,<br>
><br>
> This flag PF_SUPERPRI, indicates used superuser privileges and not use<br>
> superuser privileges. Which in any case, INDEPENDENT of all the processes<br>
> which have superuser privileges, whether they had used them or not and for<br>
> those processes which do not have superuser privileges needs to be cleared<br>
> for the child of them (since the child process has been just created and at<br>
> this point in time it has not used the superuser privileges) Its a kind of<br>
> initialization you can think of.<br>
><br>
> Regards,<br>
> Rohan.<br>
><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div>Welcome :)<br>