On 14.08.24 03:12, Andreas Karlsson wrote:
On 8/10/24 9:10 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Thoughts?
I like it. Not because of the security issue but mainly because it is
more correct to do it this way. Plus the old code running stat() on
Windows also made little sense.
I think this simple fix
On 8/10/24 9:10 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
Thoughts?
I like it. Not because of the security issue but mainly because it is
more correct to do it this way. Plus the old code running stat() on
Windows also made little sense.
I think this simple fix can be committed.
Andreas
Hi,
> I was playing with a static analyzer security scanner and it flagged a
> time-of-check-time-of-use violation in libpq. I was going to propose a
> fix for this on -hackers, since you probably can't do anything
> interesting with this, but then I figured I'd better check here first.
>
> libpq
I was playing with a static analyzer security scanner and it flagged a
time-of-check-time-of-use violation in libpq. I was going to propose a
fix for this on -hackers, since you probably can't do anything
interesting with this, but then I figured I'd better check here first.
libpq checks the
