Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 31 Mar 2001 11:18:09 -0700
From:      Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org>
To:        Paul Herman <pherman@frenchfries.net>
Cc:        Bill Moran <wmoran@iowna.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Security problems with access(2)? 
Message-ID:  <200103311819.f2VIJOO13998@harmony.village.org>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 31 Mar 2001 19:49:48 %2B0200." <Pine.BSF.4.33.0103311945010.13408-100000@husten.security.at12.de> 
References:  <Pine.BSF.4.33.0103311945010.13408-100000@husten.security.at12.de>  

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <Pine.BSF.4.33.0103311945010.13408-100000@husten.security.at12.de> Paul Herman writes:
: Shouldn't the stat(2) manpage then also carry the same warning that
: access(2) has (apparently dating back to 4.4BSD-Lite)?  ...or maybe
: even a suggestion to use fstat(2) instead...

No.  stat can be used safely.  In fact, it can even be used to detect
when the old switch-er-ooo has taken place on file systems that
conform to the POSIX standard.  However, it does take some care to use 
it safely.

Warner

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200103311819.f2VIJOO13998>