Re:Why bother with argv[0]?
by kelnos on Tuesday September 03, 2024 @10:12PM
(#41441217)
> it's about highlighting a problem exists and that it's worth solving.
If so, then I disagree with the premise of the article, fundamentally. I don't see a problem. If someone is writing security software and doesn't already know about the mutability of argv[0], and doesn't know that (on Linux at least) /proc/$PID/exe is the only correct way to gt the binary backing a process... well, then they have no business writing security software.
There is no problem here. The author is making a big deal about nothing, either because they have a weird axe to grind, or because they're ignorant.
If so, then I disagree with the premise of the article, fundamentally. I don't see a problem. If someone is writing security software and doesn't already know about the mutability of argv[0], and doesn't know that (on Linux at least) /proc/$PID/exe is the only correct way to gt the binary backing a process... well, then they have no business writing security software.
There is no problem here. The author is making a big deal about nothing, either because they have a weird axe to grind, or because they're ignorant.