[lkml]   [2010]   [Apr]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] fcntl.h: define AT_EACCESS
    Can you share some justification why it's worth extending
    faccessat() with new options?

    Isn't faccessat() insecure in most use cases, due to TOCTTOU
    (time-of-check to time-of-use) vulnerabilities? When faccessat()
    returns 0, you learn that at some point in the past, the process had
    permission to access a given file, though the process may or may not
    have permission at the moment. Why is that a useful thing to know?

    I'm sure you're familiar with all the standard arguments why using
    access() tends to represent a security vulnerability. Is there a reason
    why similar arguments do not apply to faccessat()?

     \ /
      Last update: 2010-04-20 00:31    [W:0.040 / U:0.140 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site