From owner-freebsd-fs Fri Oct 31 10:39:18 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id KAA26391 for fs-outgoing; Fri, 31 Oct 1997 10:39:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-fs) Received: from smtp04.primenet.com (smtp04.primenet.com [206.165.5.85]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id KAA26384 for ; Fri, 31 Oct 1997 10:39:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tlambert@usr05.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp04.primenet.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA02651; Fri, 31 Oct 1997 11:39:04 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr05.primenet.com(206.165.6.205) via SMTP by smtp04.primenet.com, id smtpd002631; Fri Oct 31 11:38:54 1997 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr05.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id LAA01803; Fri, 31 Oct 1997 11:38:36 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199710311838.LAA01803@usr05.primenet.com> Subject: Re: disabled symlinks To: wosch@cs.tu-berlin.de (Wolfram Schneider) Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 18:38:35 +0000 (GMT) Cc: Don.Lewis@tsc.tdk.com, wosch@cs.tu-berlin.de, roberto@keltia.freenix.fr, freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: from "Wolfram Schneider" at Oct 31, 97 12:09:17 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > 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.