Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 12:18:49 -0500 From: "William E. Baxter" <web@superscript.com> To: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: bright@wintelcom.net Subject: Re: getpeereid() syscall patch for FreeBSD 4.0 Message-ID: <20000808121849.A27414@zeus.superscript.com> In-Reply-To: <20000808093527.D4854@fw.wintelcom.net>; from bright@wintelcom.net on Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 09:35:28AM -0700 References: <20000808112602.A17676@zeus.superscript.com> <20000808093527.D4854@fw.wintelcom.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
With getpeereid() the credentials are passed at connect() and do not require the client to send data. Therefore clients cannot consume connections anonymously. W. On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 09:35:28AM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > I haven't used the credential passing feature of sendmsg(), but I > was wondering what advantages this has over being able to pass > kernel verified id's through a unix domain socket using SCM_CREDS. > My reading of UNP seems to indicate that it offers the same features. > > -Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org] > "I have the heart of a child; I keep it in a jar on my desk." > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000808121849.A27414>