qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Stitcher <astitc...@redhat.com>
Subject RE: [c++] Simplifying test environments and running tests on installations
Date Mon, 09 Nov 2009 15:18:33 GMT
On Fri, 2009-11-06 at 16:18 -0500, Steve Huston wrote:
> ...
> A startup script can always set LD_LIBRARY_PATH.

It can't set a path without potentially affecting the shared libraries
that the executable itself loads. So I don't think this is a viable
solution. Setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH itself is generally recognised to be a
security risk.

What I'm suggesting is to keep the module load path and the ordinary
shared library load path completely separate, which I think is really
what we intend to do (at least on Unix like environments, even on
Windows it seems like good idea). It seems to me to be completely
sensible never to try to load module from the default LD_LIBRARY_PATH.

...
> Also, trying to evade the OS policy is 1) confusing for people who
> understand the policy, like sysadmins, and 2) a potential security
> hole. I've done this before and would like to never go back.

As above I think it's the reverse - setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH itself is
the potential security issue.

Andrew



---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project:      http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:dev-subscribe@qpid.apache.org


Mime
View raw message