C library system-call wrappers, or the lack thereof

Re:C library system-call wrappers, or the lack thereof by btbuilder on Wednesday November 14, 2018 @03:19AM (#18448379)

As the article eludes to it is not without its challenges, however. As an example see this issue: https://github.com/golang/go/issues/1435 which goes into some of the details why implementing a call for setuid() is not straightforward without the knowledge built into glibc.

Also the trickiness of having efficient process fork/exec based on vfork: http://ewontfix.com/7/ and the considerations going into Go: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/46173/

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:C library system-call wrappers, or the lack thereof by pm215 on Wednesday November 14, 2018 @07:15AM (#18449278)

I think for setuid in particular the right fix is for the kernel to provide a new syscall that operates on the whole process. The current hoops that glibc has to jump through with signals are complicated (and maybe racy? it's been a while since I looked at the code) and tie up a signal for libc's private use; better support at the kernel layer would allow that to all be eventually dropped.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:C library system-call wrappers, or the lack thereof by carapace on Wednesday November 14, 2018 @12:00PM (#18451381)

( allude (elude means escape))

[ Parent | on HN ]