> If the program is anything in the nature of Fail2ban then just causing it to die is a serious problem If that causes a serious problem, then the architecture

> If the program is anything in the nature of Fail2ban then just causing it to die is a serious problem If that causes a serious problem, then the architecture is bad and unsuitable for solving that problem (remember: programs can also die because of OOM conditions, flakey hardware, admin errors. If this leaves a gaping security hole open for an attacker, or lead to DoS, then you need a better approach; fail2ban functionality should be in the process handling logins for example, not a separate entity watching logfiles, which might be broken too). > Being able to induce a restart is a huge increase in attack surface. Compared to what? Certainly not C code, where very common issues are easily exploitable for arbitrary code execution.