On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 11:26:33PM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 11:16:01AM -0700, Andrey Petrov wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 01:13:34AM -0400, R. C. Dowdeswell wrote:
> > > And, to clarify that statement a little bit, there are certain memory
> > > protections that reasonable Unices put even on root level processes, i.e.
> > > you can't look at memory in other processes.  This protection allows a
> > 
> > What about /dev/(k)mem, procfs, ptrace?
> 
> See the discussion of securelevel in the init manual page.  And if you
> think of a clever way around the protections described there, please let
> me know; I will fix it, as we have several times in the past (the first
> and most memorable of these "oops!  I guess someone forgot about..." was
> being able to ptrace process 1 :-) ).
>

I think I meant to say there are no certain memory protection that
reasonable Unices put even on root. At least today.

My opinion is that accessing memory is sometimes desired and needed
and looking on the problem from that side I think that there must
be possibility to access that and other memories and to ptrace processes
0, 1 and 2!

--
	Andrey