On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 11:16:54AM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote: > Oliver Falk wrote: > >Most developers I know, don't worry about >warnings<, but do if their > >code aborts. If a developer then doesn't worry about the real (security) > >problem, but only about the abort itself and just workaround that - it's > >simply a fault... The other option? stderr "FIX YOUR OPEN :-P"; sleep > >600. :-) > > > >If you compile the whole Fedora tree, how many warnings will you see? > >How many warnings are about 'better use mkstemp' - for security > >reasons... If you don't abort you'll not catch the developers > >attention... It's too bad, but true... Don't want to step on dev's toes > >of course - it's for sure not true for *all* developers! > I was talking about runtime warnings... Really nasty looking messages > so they couldn't be ignored... Even a runtime warning is a wrong thing to do, aborting immediately is the only sane thing. If you let it through, it can create a file with random mode. Say if a root process creates a file with 4777 perms, do you really want to risk that while that process is scheduled away somebody copies a shell into that file and runs it? Jakub -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
