Re: fcntl(SETLK) [was Re: 2nd update on TOAST] - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Chris Bitmead
Subject Re: fcntl(SETLK) [was Re: 2nd update on TOAST]
Date
Msg-id 396743EB.62592694@bitmead.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: fcntl(SETLK) [was Re: 2nd update on TOAST]  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
> There's a possible DoS attack when someone else comes first and creates a
> file /tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432. But detecting whether there's another program
> running on that socket (if it's a socket) isn't going to help because you
> most likely won't be able to delete it anyway. The solution to this is to
> make the path of the socket file configurable more easily so that the
> administrator has the choice of putting it a safer place that he prepared
> appropriately.

If you are worried about DoS, I think the only solution is to figure out
a way to be using one of the reserved <1000 ports. I don't think there's
any way around that is there? Also presumably not using a reserved port
is a security risk. Not that I'm worried.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Bruce Momjian
Date:
Subject: Re: fcntl(SETLK) [was Re: 2nd update on TOAST]
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: crypt and MD5 - still not wanted