Re: [PATCH] set*uid() must not fail-and-return on OOM/rlimits

On Sunday 20 August 2006 18:28, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > sounds like a good argument to get the setuid functions marked
> > __must_check in glibc...
> 
> There are too many false positives.  E.g., in a SUID binaries switching
> back from a non-root UID to root will not fail.  Very common.

Well, I would say it clearly depends on the actual kernel
implementation if that can fail or not.
So userspace should really always check.

-- 
Greetings Michael.
-
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/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH] set*uid() must not fail-and-return on OOM/rlimits
    • From: Solar Designer <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] set*uid() must not fail-and-return on OOM/rlimits
    • From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] set*uid() must not fail-and-return on OOM/rlimits
    • From: Ulrich Drepper <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] set*uid() must not fail-and-return on OOM/rlimits
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] set*uid() must not fail-and-return on OOM/rlimits
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] set*uid() must not fail-and-return on OOM/rlimits
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] set*uid() must not fail-and-return on OOM/rlimits
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]