Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 18:38:35 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: wosch@cs.tu-berlin.de (Wolfram Schneider) Cc: Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com, wosch@cs.tu-berlin.de, roberto@keltia.freenix.fr, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: disabled symlinks Message-ID: <199710311838.LAA01803@usr05.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <p1ivhyeqjdu.fsf@panke.panke.de> from "Wolfram Schneider" at Oct 31, 97 12:09:17 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Also, shouldn't > > the same change be made to both lstat() and olstat()? > > This is a cosmetic change. I don't think we should change > old system calls if it is not necessary. I doubt that anybody > use an old ls(1) command. This whole thing was billed as a security workaround for a race condition that didn't want to get fixed the right way. 8-(. If it's for security, what prevents a putative hacker from calling legacy code which uses the olstat entry point? Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199710311838.LAA01803>