Ethereal-dev: Re: [Ethereal-dev] Next steps for privilege separation, some capture engine ques

Note: This archive is from the project's previous web site, ethereal.com. This list is no longer active.

From: "John McDermott" <jjm@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2005 09:12:35 -0700
On Tue, 08 Feb 2005 01:30:51 +0100, Ulf Lamping <ulf.lamping@xxxxxx> wrote:

To avoid that, perhaps you could have the client write it to a file in /tmp (or %TEMP% or whatever) each time it opens a file.

Write *what* to a tmp file?

I was thinking of writing the full path to the file being opened for capture. That would be very little to write and very quick.


I would guess it might be the best idea that the child should open and close the capturing files in any case. This scheme must be used IMHO in the ringbuffer case, as the child shouldn't have to wait for the client to open a new (ringbuffer) file when the old is "full".

True.


Saying this, a simple but working solution might be: The client will pass the (temporary or user's) filename to the client and when the child opens the first/next file, it will send the currently used filename (e.g. the current ringbuffer filename) at that moment to the client. However, I currently don't know the correct marshalling for this, but we'll see.

Oh, that sounds like a good solution: send the filename to the parent when the file is *opened*. That should be fairly uncomplicated.

--john



--
John McDermott, CCP
Writer, Educator, Consultant
jjm@xxxxxxxxxx        www.jkintl.com
V: +1 505/377-6293  F: +1 505/377-6313