"Frans Klaver" <fransklaver@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> Wouldn't access(2) with R_OK|X_OK give you exactly what you want without >> this much trouble? > > I just had a good look through the man page of access(2), and I think > it depends. access works for the real uid, which is what I attempted > to implement in the above check as well. However, do we actually need > to use the real uid or do we need the set uid (geteuid(2))? Does it matter? We do not use seteuid or setegid ourselves and we do not expect to be installed as owned by root with u+s bit set. access(2) checks with real uid exactly because it would not make a difference to normal user level programs _and_ it makes it easier for a suid programs to check with the real identity, and our use case falls into the former, no? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html