Re: Liberating locked up ports
Re: Liberating locked up ports
- Subject: Re: Liberating locked up ports
- From: Bernd Löhr <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 08:56:03 +0100
Am Montag, 27.01.03 um 20:42 Uhr schrieb Quinn:
You can make your application setuid, but a) that's generally a bad
idea, b) won't work with CFM, and c) most applications can't just get
away with creating their endpoints at startup time but instead need to
create them sometime after startup.
This is true with our server. We create endpoints only when needed - at
a later time. Most customers now run the server as root :-( which
leaves us with a bad feeling in the stomach.
Am Dienstag, 28.01.03 um 01:20 Uhr schrieb Glenn Anderson:
What is it going to take to get a good solution to this problem? As it
stands at the moment, a lot of developers are having to jump through
flaming hoops to implement less than good solutions to a problem that
could be fixed by Apple removing a single digit number of lines of
code from the kernel (I think it is 4 lines, 2 for TCP and 2 for UDP,
but it is a while since I looked).
Most OS X users don't need this restriction, and would be better off
without it. For those OS X users who think they need this restriction,
they would probably be much better off if they had some way of
specifying on a per port basis which users could bind to which port
(or on a per user basis which ports the user can bind to), and not
just for ports less than 1024, for all fixed port numbers. What is it
going to take to get something done about this?
I can only join you here.
But, as we say here, representing the 'Old Europe' :-))
"Sometimes Apple is as flexible as a double-T beam" - Quinn knows what
I mean...
Bernd
_______________________________________________
macnetworkprog mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/macnetworkprog
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.