From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619.2)
In-Reply-To: <200501261553.j0QFr9w28322@zamenhof.cs.utwente.nl>
References: <200501261553.j0QFr9w28322@zamenhof.cs.utwente.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Message-Id: <31210468ab0a3b26d1840341520b0129@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: arisawa@ar.aichi-u.ac.jp
Subject: Re: [9fans] tftpd vs assumptions about user none? (to have or have
	not home dir)
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 10:38:45 +0900
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 3762aff8-eace-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

Hello

I examined tftpd.

Current source code tftpd.c is this order:
	chdir(dir) -> listen ->  setuser()
But I suspect distributed binary:
	term% ls -l /n/sources/plan9/386/bin/ip/tftpd
	--rwxrwxr-x M 105 glenda sys 129444 Dec 27 13:33 
/n/sources/plan9/386/bin/ip/tftpd
	term% sum /n/sources/plan9/386/bin/ip/tftpd
	ec968664 129444 /n/sources/plan9/386/bin/ip/tftpd
is not this order.
Because
	term% ps
	...
	none            766    0:00   0:00     144K Open     tftpd
	..
If we compile the source that should be
	term% ps
	...
	arisawa         722    0:00   0:00     120K Open     8.tftpd
	...

I am uneasy if tftpd is running as hostowner.
because that can make security problem.
therefore I hope tftpd.c is coded in this order:
	setuser() -> listen ->  chdir(dir)

I want farther...
1. read only option
2. name space configuration

Kenji Arisawa