On 07/27/14 05:36, Rich Felker wrote:
On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 08:12:53AM -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
On 07/24/14 16:41, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 07:28:26AM -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
I should add that this updated patch addresses Rich's points: 1) I've tested
this for both dynamic and static linking and I tested that libressl builds
and works correctly. 2) I added a link to the musl commit for the reasoning
behind this approach.
On 07/22/14 13:27, [email protected] wrote:
From: "Anthony G. Basile" <[email protected]>
issetugid() returns 1 if the process environment or memory address space
is considered tainted, and returns 0 otherwise. This happens, for example,
when a process's privileges are elevated by the setuid or setgid flags on
an executable belonging to root. This function first appeard in OpenBSD 2.0
and is needed for the LibreSSL.
This patch follows the same logic as the equivalent musl commit. For more
information see the commit message at
http://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/commit/?id=ddddec106fd17c3aca3287005d21e92f742aa9d4
---
include/unistd.h | 8 ++++++++
libc/misc/file/issetugid.c | 12 ++++++++++++
libc/misc/internals/__uClibc_main.c | 12 ++++++++++++
3 files changed, 32 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 libc/misc/file/issetugid.c
diff --git a/include/unistd.h b/include/unistd.h
index 540062a..6c2c8c2 100644
--- a/include/unistd.h
+++ b/include/unistd.h
@@ -1168,6 +1168,14 @@ extern long int syscall (long int __sysno, ...) __THROW;
#endif /* Use misc. */
+#ifdef __USE_MISC
is MISC (or MISC alone) an appropriate guard?
I had a hard time (and still have a hard time) deciding this even
after carefully reading include/features.h. The function started in
openbsd and migrated to free and netbsd, but its not in 4.3BSD.
_USE_MISC is looser but does include SYS V. I'm thinking now to
just remove the guard. I did speak to Rich about what musl's doing
but it doesn't seem appropriate here.
If there are no strong opinions, I'll just remove the guard and
resubmit in a few days.
Your other comments below are good.
I don't think removing the guard would be correct at all; that would
expose it even in profiles where the namespace is supposed to conform
to POSIX/XSI. If __USE_MISC is inappropriate, the solution would be to
move it to a more-inclusive featureset, not a less-inclusive one.
Rich
Yeah since unistd.h is POSIX/XSI and issetugid is not, I guess you
really do need *some* guard. As I see it, we have only two
possibilities (from include/features.h):
__USE_BSD Define 4.3BSD things.
__USE_MISC Define things common to BSD and System V Unix.
The other choices _USE_POSIX* _USE_XOPEN* _USE_GNU etc are clearly wrong.
issetugid is not in 4.3BSD, and MISC is more inclusive, hence my
original choice.
So now I'm leaning back using __USE_MISC.
--
Anthony G. Basile, Ph. D.
Chair of Information Technology
D'Youville College
Buffalo, NY 14201
(716) 829-8197
_______________________________________________
uClibc mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
