Re: RFC: [PATCH] SCM_CREDS support 1(2)
On Wed, 2013-10-16 at 00:49 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Samuel Thibault, le Wed 16 Oct 2013 00:48:35 +0200, a écrit :
> > Because the receiver does not trust the sender.
>
> And that is the *whole* point of SCM_CREDS. Otherwise the sender could
> simply write a mere struct, without having to go through SCM_*.
Do you mean sending the credentials info in the data part? Well, for
that there are no checks, are there?
OK, I'll move the check to recvmsg.c then. No problem:) We can also do a
full re-authentication at the receive end, should that be added too?
(With a check at the receive end faulty information might be sent,
right?)
Reply to: