From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Apr 2 7:16:36 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C5AF37B71E for ; Mon, 2 Apr 2001 07:16:34 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (robert@fledge.pr.watson.org [192.0.2.3]) by fledge.watson.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with SMTP id f32EGSh89620; Mon, 2 Apr 2001 10:16:29 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 10:16:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: Greg Black , Bill Moran Subject: Re: Security problems with access(2)? In-Reply-To: <20010401232526.A9586@dragon.nuxi.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, 1 Apr 2001, David O'Brien wrote: > On Sun, Apr 01, 2001 at 11:02:11PM -0400, Robert Watson wrote: > > eaccess_file(2) - Using effective credentials, check to see if the > > requested access is permitted on the file or directory identified by the > > provided pathname. > > Why not stick to existing naming practices? > eaccess() I'm not attached to the names, but this is in line with the naming conventions from POSIX.1e (acl_*_{fd,file}(), cap_*_{fd,file}(), et al). I'm quite happy to move to an eaccess() and feaccess() model. The patches are quite minimal, so I'll post them later today when I check that the name-changed version compiles and runs properly still :-). Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project robert@fledge.watson.org NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message