Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 13:20:51 -0600 From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> To: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: mktemp() vs. mkstemp() Message-ID: <200005151920.NAA39122@harmony.village.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Mon, 15 May 2000 12:39:46 MDT." <39204472.706CB1D2@softweyr.com> References: <39204472.706CB1D2@softweyr.com> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0005141952440.20005-100000@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <39204472.706CB1D2@softweyr.com> Wes Peters writes: : We could simply redefine mktemp to not be such a security hole. Do : common programs that use mktemp depend on side effects? mktemp cannot be defined such that it isn't a security hole. That's why mkstemp was invented. Warner 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?200005151920.NAA39122>