Re: [patch] mmap() MAP_TEXT implementation (to use for shared libraries)

On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 21:53 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 12:48:19PM -0600, Ian Lepore wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 21:41 +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > > After a second thought, I do not like your proposal as well. +x is set for
> > > shebang scripts, and allowing PROT_EXEC to set VV_TEXT for them means
> > > that such scripts are subject for write denial.
> > 
> > You say that like it's a bad thing.  I hate it when I accidentally edit
> > a script that's running and then the script fails because I did.  I
> > would be much happier if it acted just like any other executable and
> > prevented modification while it's running.
> 
> For me, if other user can block my modifications of my script by the mere
> fact that script has o+rx rights, is indeed bad. I do use real machines
> sometime.

But you don't feel the same way about a compiled program?

I see absolutely no difference between the two, conceptually.  To me,
changing an application while it's running is bad.  It makes no
difference what language the application is written in.

-- Ian