<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: mutt/580: mutt stores PGP passphrase insecurely



On Fri, Sep 22, 2006 at 03:24:05PM +0200, Moritz Barsnick wrote:

> While you're at it, you might want to evaluate the return code of
> mlock()/munlock(). My manpage (old Linux 2.4.20 system) has the return
> values ENOMEM, EPERM, EINVAL.

That's nice. The manpages I have say:

RETURN VALUE
   On  success  these system calls return 0.  On error, -1 is returned,
   errno is set appropriately, and no changes are made to any locks in the
   address space of the process.

This is basically incompatible with what you're describing. If we can't even
do it simply between major versions of Linux, I would suggest the feature's
going to be more hassle than it's worth by the time we get done with all the
operating systems.

Brendan/Thomas, you want to make a call on this?

-- 
Paul

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature