3 ms·
This is the best argument for not doing this imo. "Classic UNIX behavior was that environment variables were public (any user could see them with the right fla
by jheriko 12y ago
This is the best argument for not doing this imo.
"Classic UNIX behavior was that environment variables were public (any user could see them with the right flags to "ps") so it was well-known not to put anything secret there."
The same logic applies to Windows environments and modern *nix too...
Storing private data in a public location is obviously a bad idea.
- marcosdumay 12y agoOk, but that's classical behaviour. Modern *nix behaviour is treating the environment as private data. I don't get the reason for all that disagreement. Both methos have clear practival advantages and problems, and both are nearly as secure as the other. Use whatever fits better your problem.
- otterley 12y agoIt doesn't work that way anymore, though. Only root can see other processes' environments via ps(1) now.
- otterley 12y agoOn Linux, at least, only root can view a process' environment via ps(1). So it's at least as secure as the filesystem from an inspection point of view.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- elchief 12y agoIt's not public. Only a given user or root can see the envvar. Same as a file.