| |||||||||||||
Respite from the OOM killerRespite from the OOM killerPosted Sep 30, 2004 12:54 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304)In reply to: Respite from the OOM killer by copsewood Parent article: Respite from the OOM killer
This means that any malicious user without sufficiently vicious ulimits can exhaust not just memory but disk space as well, even on disks he can't write to.
Is this entirely wise?
(Log in to post comments)
Respite from the OOM killer Posted Sep 30, 2004 13:39 UTC (Thu) by fergal (subscriber, #602) [Link] Right now, such a user would cause random processes to be killed, which is arguably worse. Well written programs can gracefully handle a lack of disk space, they cannot gracefully handle being killed by the OOM killer.
|
|||||||||||||