Re: why not remove AF_LOCAL sockets on last close?

[Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>]

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 09:02:34AM -0400, Matthew Mondor wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 14:51:45 +0200
> Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:55:51PM -0400, Thor Simon wrote:
> > > Can anyone tell me why, exactly, we shouldn't remove bound AF_LOCAL
> > > sockets from the filesystem on last close?
> > 
> > If you want to do that, wouldn't it be easier to just go the Linux route
> > and move them into a separate (virtual) namespace completely?
> 
> Could this not pose security risks in certain scenarios?  Or would such
> a namespace also support permissions?

Permissions are easy. What is more difficult is how to change them
externally. It could still provide a virtual filesystem for that part of
the management, just that it doesn't really do anything.

Joerg