Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!rutgers!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!dkuug!uts!neulynne From: neulynne@uts.uni-c.dk (Mogens Lynnerup) Newsgroups: news.software.b Subject: Re: C News and setuid(geteuid) Message-ID: Date: 3 Feb 91 17:36:00 GMT References: <1991Feb2.060633.23602@zoo.toronto.edu> <4f948f06.1bc5b@pisa.ifs.umich.edu> Sender: neulynne@uts.uni-c.dk (Mogens Lynnerup) Organization: UNI-C, Danish Computing Centre for Research and Education Lines: 24 In-Reply-To: rees@pisa.ifs.umich.edu's message of 2 Feb 91 21:46:48 GMT >>>>> On 2 Feb 91 21:46:48 GMT, rees@pisa.ifs.umich.edu (Jim Rees) said: Jim> ...it's hard to be sure just *what* a modern System V does with Jim> setuid(geteuid()), but judging from the complaints we have had, it Jim> doesn't set the real uid (i.e. it botches the setuid() call) or getuid() Jim> doesn't return the real uid (a different botch). Well that's more or less the same conclusion I've come up with. Maybe this stuff about being able to/needing to do the setuid(geteuid) the way that C News expects it to, is really not a question about old versus new UNIX systems but a question about SYS V versus BSD. And now to my original question. Why will one want to set the read UID equal the effective UID? I've had C News running for about nine months with the setuid(geteuid) stuff disabled and as fare as I can see everything works. -- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + Mogens Lynnerup + + UNI-C Aarhus, Danish Computing Centre for Research and Education. + + Olof Palmes Alle 38, DK 8200 Aarhus C. + + Phone: +45-86-784444 + + + + E-Mail: neulynne@uts.uni-c.dk or neulynne@vm.uni-c.dk + +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++