Ludo', Thanks for your answer.
Ludovic Courtès 写道：
I need more cluebat please: say I'm an attacker and connect to yourdaemon (over TCP, why not), asking it to create an empty ‘per-user/ludo’.You wouldn’t be able to do that because over TCP because the daemoncan’t tell what user you are.
No, I ask it nicely: ‘hullo daemon, I'm, er, "ludo"’.Of course the remote daemon doesn't trust me beyond pre-creating an empty per-user directory owned by the local "ludo" user only if such a user exists. It doesn't even report succes or failure to avoid leaking valid user names.
You already trust the network not to DoS you with webkitgtks, how does this new step decrease security?
Sure, it bumps the protocol version; I'm aware of that.
It’s meant for cluster setups where you have one head node that clients connect to from remote nodes.
And likely some kind of centralised user management so it's not unreasonable to handle this differently/manually.
Kind regards, T G-R
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
