[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2019 22:27:28 +0200
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@...t70.net>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Re: Hangup calling setuid() from vfork() child
* Joshua Hudson <joshudson@...il.com> [2019-09-30 12:57:34 -0700]:
> >It's simpler than that. The (retired) specification for vfork did not
> >allow anything but _exit or execve in the child after vfork, so the
> >issue doesn't arise and it works perfectly fine with threads as long
> >as you follow the requirement.
>
> I'm reading the man page for vfork and it says what it actually does, that
> is overlay the child process on the memory of the calling process.
the internals don't matter, the interface contract is
that you can only call exec* or _exit in the child.
>
> posix_spawn can't be used in the originating location, and fork() is
why?
> hogging too much memory.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
