Chuck Lever wrote: > On Mar 26, 2009, at 4:58 AM, Greg Banks wrote: >> Chuck Lever wrote: >>> >>> Our port of rpcbind (from Sun) assumes this string contains a numeric >>> UID value, not alphabetical or symbolic characters, but checks this >>> value only for AF_LOCAL RPCB_SET or RPCB_UNSET requests. In all other >>> cases, rpcbind ignores the contents of the r_owner string. >> >> Not that this makes the slightest difference to the usefulness of the >> patch, but it sounds like pretty strange behaviour for an rpcbind server >> to be using an incoming r_owner value off the wire under any >> circumstances. > > It's ignored for wire requests. r_owner is used only for AF_LOCAL > requests (ie a local file socket) where the kernel can guarantee the > owner. > > Sorry, I'm confused now. Consider the r_owner field in the rpcb structure whose XDR representation flows through the AF_LOCAL socket; is that used by rpcbind at all? I don't understand how the kernel would guarantee that? -- Greg Banks, P.Engineer, SGI Australian Software Group. the brightly coloured sporks of revolution. I don't speak for SGI. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
