Message357042
> Now your updated docs and warning read more like we are working around a Linux security bug which is not really the case - this behavior was intentionally added to the kernels and some of the code I do for a living relies on it to work properly. Admittedly the restriction of having the same UID wouldn't hurt.
I think you can use SO_REUSEPORT instead, and for UDP sockets it's identical to SO_REUSEADDR except with the same-UID restriction added?
If that's right then it might make sense to unconditionally switch SO_REUSEADDR -> SO_REUSEPORT, even in existing Python releases – on the theory that it fixes the main security hole, while being back-compatible enough to be acceptable for a point release. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2019-11-20 09:21:02 | njs | set | recipients:
+ njs, gvanrossum, asvetlov, yselivanov, dacut, vaizki |
2019-11-20 09:21:02 | njs | set | messageid: <1574241662.49.0.53991512121.issue37228@roundup.psfhosted.org> |
2019-11-20 09:21:02 | njs | link | issue37228 messages |
2019-11-20 09:21:02 | njs | create | |
|