Re: Adding shmserver

[Alexandre Julliard]

Gavriel State  writes:
> I believe that our design has pretty stringent safeguards against a buggy
> process trashing the system structures.  By write-locking the shm area,
> the possibility of a buggy app (or wine client side code) overwriting
> system structures is virtually nil.

I'm not so sure. All processes will contain the code to unlock the shm
area, and then all it takes is a jump to the wrong address. Also a bad
pointer is not the only possible problem, for instance a thread
getting stopped or killed while inside the shm lock will kill the
whole session.