setgroups() behavior

Article View: comp.std.unix

Article #1347

#1347

From: John F. Haugh II
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 1990 17:05

26 lines
1498 bytes

From: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)

I'm taking an informal survey.

1003.1 states that whether or not the current effective
GID is returned as part of the groupset returned by
getgroups() is implementation defined.

I am curious what the group's feeling is in general about
permitting the current effective GID to be added via
setgroups() to the concurrent group set using setgroups().

My reasoning is that the concurrent group set =should=
reflect all of the groups being used in determining the
process's access rights.  So, either the system should
add the EGID to the list, or it should permit the process
to explicitly add the EGID without requiring UID 0
privilege.

Please reply by mail, I'll post a summary if there is
enough interest ...
-- 
John F. Haugh II                             UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 832-8832                           Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org

Volume-Number: Volume 18, Number 39

Technical Details

Message-ID: <526@longway.TIC.COM>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!longway!std-unix

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!longway!std-unix
From: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: comp.std.unix
Subject: setgroups() behavior
Summary: how should the effective GID be handled?
Message-ID: <526@longway.TIC.COM>
Date: 2 Feb 90 17:05:09 GMT
Sender: std-unix@longway.TIC.COM
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Organization: Lone Star Cafe and BBS Service
Lines: 26
Approved: jsq@longway.tic.com (Moderator, John S. Quarterman)