Re: What to use in place of abstract unix sockets?
- In reply to: Gleb Popov : "What to use in place of abstract unix sockets?"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2021 07:50:08 UTC
08.12.2021 13:43, Gleb Popov wrote: > Hello hackers. > > I'm porting a software that does the following things on Linux: > > 1. Binds an abstract UDS (the socket name starts with '\0') > 2. Launches a "client" process. > 3. "Client" uses chroot() to constrain itself in a sort of jail. > 4. "Client" connects to the abstract UDS. > >>From what I can tell, this works because abstract UDS's do not use the > filesystem namespace, which is why "client" can connect out of the > chroot'ed environment. > > What can I do to make this software work for FreeBSD? Simply using regular > UDS instead of abstract ones doesn't work for obvious reasons - the > "client" can't find the socket file. > > Thanks in advance. If they are parent/child, you could try using socketpair().