Re: Proposal: Disable autoload of compat_xyz modules

[John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost>]

On Aug 3, 11:35am, maya%netbsd.org@localhost wrote:
} On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 01:23:17AM +0200, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
} > Taylor R Campbell <campbell+netbsd-tech-kern%mumble.net@localhost> wrote:
} > 
} > Once every compatibility module would not loaded by default, pehaps the
} > compat_xxx module could be loaded automatically if /emul/xxx/ exists?
} > 
} > The presence of that hierarchy means the system administrator really
} > meant to use compat_xxx, and it would avoid breaking existing system at
} > upgrade time.
} 
} Sounds good.
} 
} By the way, isn't that what happens in practice anyway? the only way to
} reach the COMPAT_OTHEROS code is to first exec a binary, which looks for
} an interpreter in /emul/otheros. If one doesn't exist, exec will fail.

     Not if the binary is statically linked.  I suspect that would
be the common case for at least some of the emulations.  Some of
them might not even support dynamic linking.

} I would feel more assured if COMPAT_SVR4 didn't exist in my kernels, but
} I suspect the vulnerability doesn't affect me.
} 
}-- End of excerpt from maya%netbsd.org@localhost