Subject: Re: usermount semantics changed... Why?
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Peter Seebach <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/10/2007 12:45:36
In message <20070610173456.GD18207@cs.hut.fi>, Antti Kantee writes:
>That snipped looks like it requires MNT_NOEXEC only if you are mounting on
>a file system which already has MNT_NOEXEC set in vp->v_mount->mnt_flags.
>noexec is not generally required for user mounts. My guess is it's to
>prevent the user gaining access to an exec-worthy file system in case
>e.g. /home is noexec.
Oh, good point.
Nonetheless, it is certainly a change that this is now enforced by kauth,
rather than being silently added by the syscall.