From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Oct 22 11:22:28 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA16594 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 22 Oct 1997 11:22:28 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers) Received: from phoenix.its.rpi.edu (phoenix.its.rpi.edu [128.113.161.45]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA16589 for ; Wed, 22 Oct 1997 11:22:23 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dec@phoenix.its.rpi.edu) Received: from localhost (dec@localhost) by phoenix.its.rpi.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id OAA16665; Wed, 22 Oct 1997 14:22:11 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 14:22:11 -0400 (EDT) From: "David E. Cross" To: J Wunsch cc: FreeBSD hackers Subject: Re: Possible SERIOUS bug in open()? In-Reply-To: <19971022190225.DV50844@uriah.heep.sax.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 22 Oct 1997, J Wunsch wrote: > As Jamil J. Weatherbee wrote: > > > > > This was sent to me recently... It seems to be a pretty serious hole > > > > in open() and permissions... > > > > > > Fixed. > > > > How exactly did you fix it, this is related to what I was saying about > > opening a file as RD_ONLY and WR_ONLY, ... > > Yep, this was in the same boat. The way the fix works, only one of > O_RDONLY, O_WRONLY, or O_RDWR should be possible now, and anything > else should be rejected as EINVAL. I thought that O_RDRW = O_RDONLY | O_WRONLY. -- David Cross ACS Consultant