Robert Elz wrote:
> I agree this is mostly harmless (though annoying) - but leads me to
> ponder whether or not we should have a directory permission setting
> which would allow anyone to remove their own files from a directory,
> but not create any (assuming they don't also have write permission
Date:Sat, 09 Nov 2024 02:00:54 +0700
From:Robert Elz
Message-ID: <284.1731092...@jacaranda.noi.kre.to>
| Even though it is not at all meaningful in any naming sense, perhaps
| we could reuse the sticky bit on directories (which was once used for
| what is now t
Mouse wrote:
> > [I]f you use 'syslogd -u user', then syslogd can't create a pidfile
> > because that is done post-setuid.
>
> What is the intended use case for -u?
To run syslogd as an unprivileged user rather than as
root. It starts up as root to open the log sockets,
then changes euid to the
Date:Fri, 8 Nov 2024 12:02:38 -0500 (EST)
From:Mouse
Message-ID: <202411081702.maa21...@stone.rodents-montreal.org>
| What is the intended use case for -u?
My guess would be so that the syslogd process isn't running as root,
and so can do less harm if some bug is u
> [I]f you use 'syslogd -u user', then syslogd can't create a pidfile
> because that is done post-setuid.
What is the intended use case for -u? Or, to put it another way, why
is this something that needs fixing? My own reaction is that if you're
using -u, it's not appropriate to write the usual
On Sat, Nov 02, 2024 at 10:36:10PM +0100, Roland Illig wrote:
> In the system headers, we use this pattern a lot:
> > #if (_POSIX_C_SOURCE - 0 >= 200809L) || defined(_NETBSD_SOURCE)
>
> Are the parentheses around the first condition really necessary? If so,
> for which cases?
>
> Is the "-
Hello,
20 years ago, I filed bin/27309. In short, if you use
'syslogd -u user', then syslogd can't create a pidfile
because that is done post-setuid.
My suggested fix (diff attached) is to create the
pidfile and chown it before changing UIDs. The
subsequent pidfile(3) call will happily take ove
