Subject: Re: Addition to force open to open only regular files
To: None <tech-kern@netbsd.org>
From: Greg A. Woods <woods@weird.com>
List: tech-kern
Date: 11/24/2000 02:17:37
[ On Thursday, November 23, 2000 at 22:35:05 (-0800), Greywolf wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: Addition to force open to open only regular files 
>
> but why not a reserve(path,mode,uid,gid) and ropen() (reserved open) call
> if there is a concern about security?  It's that half-open thing that
> was discussed a while ago, but actually separated out into two calls;
>[....]
> Or is this too akin to the earlier discussion to be of value?

Yes, that is in fact exactly equivalent to the half_open thing because
the similarly half_open thing would still require a second call to
complete the open and thus it's just as bogus for all the same reasons.

-- 
							Greg A. Woods

+1 416 218-0098      VE3TCP      <gwoods@acm.org>      <robohack!woods>
Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>