From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 28 17:17:50 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31A1C1065672 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:17:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rjhjr0@gmail.com) Received: from mail-yw0-f54.google.com (mail-yw0-f54.google.com [209.85.213.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8BEA8FC15 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:17:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ywf7 with SMTP id 7so1465751ywf.13 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 10:17:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=0pDRqCFN991EfRYG9OqD+2oU5WUF8OyaxV1l3XZNDhQ=; b=VAe7JHmWUa8sliUrvaGQgly4py+ATjp8gkxhwITD5g4dPTrpIO+hgNnXmzBDyzsUpm dbN+OLruHiDNgwcjWzPWn4JsuQ6mrUWbeQx5iiTPtcIxWZ+ka6pCiyFiCPwcAvmZPRN/ DQ2HH270qOMjxsUeyaXF6Q8Zn4NIlWq7pVBsY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; b=oJb8eBy5SpTkOZbj1vEkVQPUKug0iuRDXwpCM2dwzhR1aq3nq3x9esNWfOdczzaDqY wI9mTePtr9T0GoAUh5sjwhTjc7UUQOJKfQ5lJVJUTD+VsateN0HMO+cohL4F+85MP4bY kwwB37NrUwZEpD4/3Ab02Ra0L4GDsEfnPHXrY= Received: by 10.236.143.1 with SMTP id k1mr4888487yhj.172.1304011068966; Thu, 28 Apr 2011 10:17:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ip98-163-115-74.dc.dc.cox.net [98.163.115.74]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id x44sm950894yhm.75.2011.04.28.10.17.42 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 28 Apr 2011 10:17:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 13:17:41 -0400 From: Bob Hall To: RW Message-ID: <20110428171740.GA5840@stainmore> Mail-Followup-To: Bob Hall , RW , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <20110425151536.GA61425@stainmore> <20110425175420.GA61811@stainmore> <20110425232908.4104e026@gumby.homeunix.com> <20110426025614.GA62745@stainmore> <20110426104151.596bcc19@gumby.homeunix.com> <20110427014554.1e4c5281@gumby.homeunix.com> <20110427095420.GA41208@kongemord.krig.net> <20110428001010.13a76d07@gumby.homeunix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110428001010.13a76d07@gumby.homeunix.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Password theft from memory? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2011 17:17:50 -0000 On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 12:10:10AM +0100, RW wrote: > I'm not saying that anonymous mappings used by malloc aren't > zero-filled, just that it's not mentioned anywhere in the mmap man > page. I think it's just taken as read. I just got what you're trying to say. Unfortunately, your quotes mislead me about what you were concerned about. You're right, the man page doesn't explicitly state whether anonymous mappings are zero filled or not. Since man pages prioritize concision, I would expect the page to explain how anonymous mappings are different from other mappings, but not how they are the same.