Re: Does mountd/statd really need to listen on a privileged port??

[Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1105 bytes --]

On Thursday 12 April 2007, Neil Brown wrote:
> mountd/statd currently bind to privileged ports to listen for
> requests.
>
> This is really a bad thing to do as there is no range of privilege
> ports that is guaranteed not to be assigned to some service.

s/privilege// ... you have the same problem regardless of privilege state ... 
svn/mysql/postgresql/etc... can be just as troublesome for people

redhat has a long standing open bug on the topic with no real workable 
solution (the one posted requires a lot of overhad as every package needs 
to "opt-in" with the process)

> But is there some reason that mountd/statd need a priv port that I
> haven't thought of?

if that's true, then we could at least rewrite the socket code to bind to 
ports that do not appear in /etc/services (via getservbyport()) ... that'd 
allow admins to easily prevent things like mountd/statd from hijacking 
reserved ports ...

i just wish all the rpc things *asked portmap* for the port so we could put 
all of this logic in portmap and not duplicate effort across all rpc 
daemons :(
-mike

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 345 bytes --]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 140 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs