Name or Names in service files? (Disconnect between the spec and our implementation)

Thiago Macieira thiago at
Wed Dec 6 11:35:27 PST 2006

Havoc Pennington wrote:
>The wildcard does seem like a pretty clean solution, as long as it's OK
>to spawn an arbitrary number of these processes without validating the
>exact name first. There might be a problem using this on the system bus,
>because anyone could start an arbitrary number of these processes as the
>gvfs user, and also we'd have to adapt the security policy stuff to work
>in this case (right now you need to specify a particular bus name).

I had thought the system bus did not have service activation. Unless those 
services are setuid executables...

  Thiago Macieira  -  thiago (AT) - thiago (AT)
    PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
    E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C  966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :

More information about the dbus mailing list