[2389] in bugtraq
Re: a point is being missed
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (System Administrator)
Fri Nov 10 19:08:01 1995
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 16:16:57 +0000
Reply-To: Bugtraq List <BUGTRAQ@CRIMELAB.COM>
From: System Administrator <root@iifeak.swan.ac.uk>
X-To: BUGTRAQ@CRIMELAB.COM
To: Multiple recipients of list BUGTRAQ <BUGTRAQ@CRIMELAB.COM>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951109084345.13012J-100000@itd> from "Bruce
Montrose" at Nov 9, 95 09:14:23 am
> whatever else they choose to do, but they could at least provide the means
> for others to easily replace these with static versions by the client's own
> discretion.
They could also provide a standard option so that you can pick between
1. All binaries ignore LD_*
2. All libraries on LD_* paths must be root or bin owned (id <100 etc)
3. Existing behaviour.
So you can lock down tight if you want. LD_LIBRARY path is great for development
but not always for other things.
Alan
