[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Nmh-workers] tempfile creation
From: |
Josh Bressers |
Subject: |
Re: [Nmh-workers] tempfile creation |
Date: |
Wed, 27 Apr 2005 10:26:17 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2-1.3.2 (X11/20050324) |
Mike O'Dell wrote:
> if i were to hazzard a guess, the reason the code doesn't use
> mkstemp() is that [1] the code cited is likely well more than
> twice age of mkstemp() [2]and nobody has gone looking for
> things to fix that were still (apparently) working. (big grin)
While it does work, mkstemp is far superior to mktemp in every way.
There's not a terribly good reason to not use it. I've been looking at
how to best do this, but sadly the code needs serious cleanup first.
There is a lot of duplication, and it seems a lack of uniform error
handling when using tempfiles.
> the question about /tmp is probably related the security issues
> and how difficult it has been to make /tmp files robust against
> hijacking.
mkstemp should make it nearly impossible to hijack a file in /tmp.
--
JB
- [Nmh-workers] tempfile creation, Paul Fox, 2005/04/27
- Re: [Nmh-workers] tempfile creation, Mike O'Dell, 2005/04/27
- Re: [Nmh-workers] tempfile creation, Mike O'Dell, 2005/04/27
- Re: [Nmh-workers] tempfile creation, Neil W Rickert, 2005/04/27
- Modernizing core code (was Re: [Nmh-workers] tempfile creation, heymanj, 2005/04/27
- Re: Modernizing core code (was Re: [Nmh-workers] tempfile creation, Ralph Corderoy, 2005/04/28
Re: [Nmh-workers] tempfile creation, Chad Walstrom, 2005/04/27