From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 12:21:49 -0800 From: Roman Shaposhnik In-reply-to: <20081224011053.GP9593@masters10.cs.jhu.edu> To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; delsp=yes; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: <20081223180148.GO9593@masters10.cs.jhu.edu> <49516BC3.10100@kix.es> <8ccc8ba40812231553r43d7baa5mde4de7174e78ed20@mail.gmail.com> <20081224011053.GP9593@masters10.cs.jhu.edu> Subject: Re: [9fans] sendfd() on native Plan 9? Topicbox-Message-UUID: 726074b8-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 Sorry for coming into this discussion rather late, but... On Dec 23, 2008, at 5:10 PM, Nathaniel W Filardo wrote: > On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 12:53:06AM +0100, Francisco J Ballesteros > wrote: >> You can post a fd at /srv for others to use > > /srv is not an ideal answer, though it is the one I feared would be > given. > /srv allows any process running as a given user to access the posted > fd, True. But why that should be a problem in practice? If the process belongs to a user X that means user X has control over it. Thus the behavior of accidental consumption of an fd that was meant to be consumed by some other process can only be attributed to bugs in the code, not malicious intent. Thanks, Roman.