From owner-freebsd-security  Fri Jun  7 14:30:59 1996
Return-Path: owner-security
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA23386
          for security-outgoing; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 14:30:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from critter.tfs.com ([140.145.16.108])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA23371;
          Fri, 7 Jun 1996 14:30:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from critter.tfs.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.tfs.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA00825; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 14:29:50 -0700 (PDT)
To: Paul Traina <pst@shockwave.com>
cc: Nate Williams <nate@sri.MT.net>, Barnacle Wes <softweyr@xmission.com>,
        security@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: FreeBSD's /var/mail permissions 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 07 Jun 1996 14:05:23 PDT."
             <199606072105.OAA00533@precipice.shockwave.com> 
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 1996 14:29:50 -0700
Message-ID: <823.834182990@critter.tfs.com>
From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@freebsd.org>
Sender: owner-security@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

In message <199606072105.OAA00533@precipice.shockwave.com>, Paul Traina writes:
>Mail locking, to be effective, must be soley performed through the use of
>the flock() call on the mail file itself.
>
>Locking schemes relying on other mechanisms are not effective.

say what ?  I'd better read up man the manpages for rename(2) to 
see what changed there...

What do you mean when you say "not effective" ?

--
Poul-Henning Kamp           | phk@FreeBSD.ORG       FreeBSD Core-team.
http://www.freebsd.org/~phk | phk@login.dknet.dk    Private mailbox.
whois: [PHK]                | phk@ref.tfs.com       TRW Financial Systems, Inc.
Future will arrive by its own means, progress not so.