Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com
Message-ID:	<055e01c0e9da$dc2812d0$0200a8c0@lifelesswks>
From:	"Robert Collins" <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au>
To:	"cygdev" <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
References:	<20010531124452 DOT G1870 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <48146951254 DOT 20010531164356 AT logos-m DOT ru> <20010531151226 DOT I1870 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <192151639946 DOT 20010531180204 AT logos-m DOT ru>
Subject:	Re: [RFD]: Egor's proposal for a Cygwin server process
Date:	Fri, 1 Jun 2001 00:06:16 +1000
MIME-Version:	1.0
X-Priority:	3
X-MSMail-Priority:	Normal
X-Mailer:	Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE:	Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
X-OriginalArrivalTime:	31 May 2001 13:57:43.0014 (UTC) FILETIME=[A9AB8860:01C0E9D9]

----- Original Message -----
From: "egor duda" <deo AT logos-m DOT ru>
To: "cygdev" <cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2001 12:02 AM
Subject: Re: [RFD]: Egor's proposal for a Cygwin server process


> Hi!
>
> Thursday, 31 May, 2001 Corinna Vinschen vinschen AT redhat DOT com wrote:
>
> >> a communication between client and server is restricted to local
host
> >> only, so, i suppose, we can take "mixed" approach -- use named
pipes
> >> on nt/2000 and shared memory on w9x.
>
> CV> As I wrote in my previous mail, it's essential to be sure about
> CV> the process which calls the server. Faking of pid, uid and gid
> CV> must not be possible!
>
> something similar was done in my cygserver via
> ImpersonateNamedPipeClient(). that's a clear benefit of named pipes
> before shared memory.

This is where I'll pop up and say...
COM provides benefits here: AFAIK it's got impersonation capabilities
for NT, and AFAIK degrades gracefully on 9x.

The fact that it's got difference under-the-hood implementations for NT
and 9x would aid us here.

Rob

>
> Egor.            mailto:deo AT logos-m DOT ru ICQ 5165414 FidoNet
2:5020/496.19
>
>
>

- Raw text -