In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wes Peters writes: : We could simply redefine mktemp to not be such a security hole. Do : common programs that use mktemp depend on side effects? mktemp cannot be defined such that it isn't a security hole. That's why mkstemp was invented. Warner To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
- mktemp() vs. mkstemp() James Howard
- Re: mktemp() vs. mkstemp() Lyndon Nerenberg
- Re: mktemp() vs. mkstemp() Kris Kennaway
- Re: mktemp() vs. mkstemp() Tim Vanderhoek
- Re: mktemp() vs. mkstemp() Kris Kennaway
- Re: mktemp() vs. mkstemp() Wes Peters
- Re: mktemp() vs. mkstemp() Alfred Perlstein
- Re: mktemp() vs. mkstemp() Wes Peters
- Re: mktemp() vs. mkstemp() James Howard
- Re: mktemp() vs. mkstemp() Warner Losh
- Warner Losh