[HN Gopher] Setuid in Unix created to enable a game
___________________________________________________________________
Setuid in Unix created to enable a game
Author : zdw
Score : 81 points
Date : 2023-02-04 01:53 UTC (21 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (minnie.tuhs.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (minnie.tuhs.org)
| pjmlp wrote:
| Later on early GNU/Linux games followed the same idea by
| requiring setuid to use games written against SVGALib.
| 0x0 wrote:
| That's because direct i/o and device access for VGA card
| manipulation requires root access, it's not directly relates to
| file permissions. Same with X11 servers for the longest time
| (until the kernel started providing APIs for this)
| pjmlp wrote:
| Devices are files on UNIX, as we all know from its design.
|
| It was more due to lack of userspace APIs for graphics
| programming than anything else.
| mjg59 wrote:
| Eh you also need to call iopl() which is a privileged
| operation, it's not just about file permissions
| pjmlp wrote:
| It is a Linux specific API.
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| Minor nitpick from someone who wrote device drivers at a
| FAANG whose name starts with A and who is not based in
| Seattle: devices can have a presence as a device special
| file in the filesystem, but they might be not represented
| in the filesystem also...they might be hiding down some
| hardware bus, for example.
| pjmlp wrote:
| Depends on which UNIX.
| enriquto wrote:
| Notice the author of this message!
|
| This mailing list is full of actual legends, speaking casually
| about minutiae of unix history. Do not go there unless you have a
| strong antidote against time sinks.
| Maursault wrote:
| The history blurb in the Wikipedia article for setuid doesn't
| conflict, confirms a bit, and adds some details:
| The setuid bit was invented by Dennis Ritchie and included in su.
| His employer, then Bell Telephone Laboratories, applied for a
| patent in 1972; the patent was granted in 1979 as patent number
| US 4135240 "Protection of data file contents." The patent was
| later placed in the public domain.[1]
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Setuid#History
| mort96 wrote:
| Man parents are insane. How could something like that
| _possibly_ be patentable? How does giving gigantic companies
| monopoly on a fucking setuid bit do us any good?
|
| Do/did intelligent people like Dennis Ritchie really not feel
| any discomfort by the fact that their great work robs the world
| of that very work through the parent system?
| simscitizen wrote:
| No that's not the insane part. The insane part is that this
| is the only patent that came out of entire Research UNIX
| project [1].
|
| [1] See the answer to question 25 on Rob Pike's blog:
| https://commandcenter.blogspot.com/2020/01/unix-quiz-
| answers....
| fortran77 wrote:
| It's novel and useful.
| Someone wrote:
| > How could something like that possibly be patentable?
|
| If, _back_then_, it was new, non-obvious to a person having
| ordinary skill in the art (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pers
| on_having_ordinary_skill_i...), and not the only way to do
| what it does, why wouldn't it?
|
| Now, was it, back then? I wouldn't know, but I think there is
| a decent chance it was.
| mort96 wrote:
| I should probably have been more clear, but I'm not _that_
| concerned about whether it 's patentable from a legal
| perspective as patent law currently exists. Clearly current
| laws are interpreted to allow such patents. I'm more
| concerned about, why do we think it's a Good Thing(tm) that
| companies just get state-enforced legal monopolies over
| those kinds of ideas.
| insanitybit wrote:
| Not just companies, people. That's why. It means that if
| I came up with a really novel way to solve the problem of
| protecting file contents I, an individual, can protect
| myself from some massive company just copying the idea
| and selling it.
|
| As with most laws there's good and bad.
| mort96 wrote:
| I wasn't concerning myself with people here, but with
| companies. Corporations are not people. Whether patents
| are appropriate for the lone independent inventor is its
| own discussion.
| a-user-you-like wrote:
| Let's establish the principle first: could a person
| patent it?
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| It's possible Bell Labs had the patent but also was entirely
| open to others using the idea freely.
| mort96 wrote:
| So is it good to give a company the state-backed legal
| monopoly on the idea of a permission bit to run an
| executable as a different user, as long as the company
| elects to be real nice about it?
| jjtheblunt wrote:
| Yeah i don't get that either, and agree that it does seem
| weird.
|
| maybe it was one of those that slipped through the patent
| office as outside their true expertise?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-02-04 23:01 UTC)