Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX

hiding processes

<< < (2/3) > >>

voidmain:
The uptime hack I just did to the kernel is probably  in the same area that you need. I added a kernel variable to /proc. The file I needed to modify was in "/usr/src/linux/kernel/sysctl.c". I might look around there too and see if I see anything. Most everything is set to a mode of "0644", wonder what would happen if you changed everything to "0640"?

[ December 07, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]

Stryker:

quote:Originally posted by void main:
The uptime hack I just did to the kernel is probably  in the same area that you need. I added a kernel variable to /proc. The file I needed to modify was in "/usr/src/linux/kernel/sysctl.c". I might look around there too and see if I see anything. Most everything is set to a mode of "0644", wonder what would happen if you changed everything to "0640"?

[ December 07, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]
--- End quote ---


is there a command to replace all of the 0644s to 0640s? or do i have to do it manually? (there are a lot of them)

voidmain:
In vim it would be:

:%s/0644/0640/g

Stryker:
well i tired changing that stuff, i recompiled, and made the image and started it. it didn't seem to change anything. which leads me to think that the kernel's source may have bloat. (changing something should actually change something). i'll figure this thing you yet, just give me some time.

voidmain:
Did you do an "ls -l /proc" and compare differences in permissions? Also I don't believe that sysctl.c is the file that deals with the process directories under /proc, I think that might be sched.c or one of the others. But I'm an extreme novice when it comes to hacking the kernel. I just gave you that as a possible "close" location. Oh, and that in no way is an indicator of bloat. Maybe you should ask Linus or Alan what needs to be modified.  

[ December 08, 2002: Message edited by: void main ]

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page