On 06/03/2015 11:49 PM, Vadim Kochan wrote:
...
I was faced with case when netsniff-ng silently was killed by SIGSEGV
but w/o message, I investigated that it was caused by 'sudo' which seems
for me somehow aborts this signal, but registering the SIGSEGV handler
(which printed the expected "Segmentation fault" message) in netsniff-ng
"fixed" it.
So the question is: should netsniff-ng handle SIGSEGV signal in that
case, prints message and die or this is not secured behaviour to let
know about "Segmentation fault" for the user who might have some
limitations by sudo ?
Actually may be this is only my special case when I'd like to see
"Segmentation fault" message to identify the problem in the code when
using sudo.
For SIGSEGV, we should have the default handler trigger. Looks like a
bug when registering signal handlers for other signals (and thus ignoring
it). So an own handler printing "Segmentation fault" would not be correct,
would be better to fix the registration.
Thanks,
Daniel
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"netsniff-ng" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
