On Fri, 2005-12-23 at 11:51 +0200, Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> David Wagner wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]> you write:
> >
> >>I am writing a provider that uses pthreads. The main program
> >>does not aware that the provider is using threads and it is
> >>not multithreaded.
> >>
> >>After initialization the program setuid to nobody, the
> >>problem is that my threads remains in root id.
> >
> >
> > Mixing threads and setuid programs seems like a really bad idea.
> > This is especially true if you have to ask about it -- which means
> > that you don't know enough to write such a program safely (please
> > don't take offense).
> >
>
> I know that!
> And I am aware of the (Linux implementation) implications...
>
> I don't think you read my question in deep...
> I offer a provider (Shared library), and I must deal with
> this edge condition where the main program setuid.
>
> In Linux every thread is a process so only the main thread
> is setuided.
>
> I need to catch this even in my shared library and setuid my
> threads as well, since Linux pthreads implementation does
> not take care of this.
>
> Since I am not writing the main program and since I cannot
> force the main programmer to behave any differently, I must
> handle this internally.
>
> Do you know a way to be notified when the process setuid?
Why on earth would you use LinuxThreads rather than NPTL? LinuxThreads
is obsolete and was never remotely POSIX compliant.
Lee
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
