Re: Horrible denial of service bug in autmount 5

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

Ian Kent wrote:
>> But it is an utterly daft way to implement something like that.  If you 
>> want a lock, create an explicit lock, but doing string-matching on 
>> command lines is idiotic.
> 
> This isn't a lock or anything remotely like it.

It is a lock, or at least something remotely like it.

> And, yes, if run together closely enough the check could easily fail to
> work but that isn't what the check is about.

What is it about, then?

> Put another way, running multiple instances of the autofs version 5
> daemon isn't supported at the moment.
> 
> For the common case usage multiple instances of the daemon aren't
> needed.

Pardon my earlier abrasiveness (I'm having a horrible day), but why not 
simply have /var/lock/automount and flock() it?

That way there is a sane workaround if the special cases, too.

	-hpa