On Sat, Apr 20, 2013 at 10:14:44PM -0000, Mutt wrote: > > The point is, even if your system has mkstemps(), you're probably > > better off using mktemp() the way Mutt uses it instead. You just have > > to make sure that the file does not already exist when you go to > > create it, and that you create the file 0600 so that evildoers can't > > write their exploit over your data... and Mutt does that. > > That is not sufficient with pre-NFSv3.
No, but it's generally a bad idea to put temp files on NFS. By default, if you do nothing, they'll never end up there (unless your sysadmin mounts /tmp from an nfs export, which would be dumb). And that's as it should be. Mutt currently doesn't deal well with this case, but I'm not convinced it should try. I think it would be better to document that it's not safe to put temp files on NFS. Another problem with NFS is locking, esp. pre-v3. Different vendors got it wrong in different ways. -- Derek D. Martin http://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail due to spam prevention. Sorry for the inconvenience.
pgp9xzLtxAa7d.pgp
Description: PGP signature
