In article <[email protected]>,
Christoph Badura  <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 09:45:50PM +0200, Christoph Badura wrote:
>> This is to catch the following case(s): The file might have the
>> following permissions "--x--x--x" (or equivalent where the open()ing
>> process doesn't have read or write permission).  Since you can open such
>                                                             ^can't open such
>> a file for reading or writing (except as root) you need an additional
>> flag to open() to obtain a file descriptor that can be passed to
>> fexecve().  That's what O_EXEC is for.  Whether the receiving process
>> can successfully fexecve(2) such a file descriptor is another matter.
>> That's what the "execute permission is checked by fexecve()" specifies.

The implementation I posted requires O_EXEC because this is the only way
to set FEXEC which is part of the check_exec() tests. Of course we can
elide this test and not require it in the fd case. It just seems nicely
symmetric to me the way it is now.

christos

Reply via email to