Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 16:02:41 -0400 From: Alejandro Imass <ait@p2ee.org> To: "Randal L. Schwartz" <merlyn@stonehenge.com> Cc: Chris Telting <christopher-ml@telting.org>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, Pan Tsu <inyaoo@gmail.com>, krad <kraduk@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Established method to enable suid scripts? Message-ID: <BANLkTikD3W-vQMjDQOCN5uPRT3HQqwWgOg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <868vu9qeum.fsf@red.stonehenge.com> References: <4DC9DE2C.6070605@telting.org> <201105121657.57647.j.mckeown@ru.ac.za> <4DCBFC39.8060900@telting.org> <201105130932.32144.j.mckeown@ru.ac.za> <BANLkTin4rkQouSiOy4M1uu%2BqXSWJzF_STA@mail.gmail.com> <4DCD02EF.7050808@telting.org> <86k4duh4q9.fsf@gmail.com> <868vu9qeum.fsf@red.stonehenge.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Randal L. Schwartz <merlyn@stonehenge.com> wrote: >>>>>> "Pan" =3D=3D Pan Tsu <inyaoo@gmail.com> writes: [...] > (Untested) why not just "#!/usr/local/bin/sudo" ? =A0It'll be given the > filename as an argument. Precisely. I think this thread should be forked to something like "suid versus sudo for scripts"? I second the sudo idea instead of suiding the interpreter, and it's a better solution to the one I have used in the past like C-wrapping and suiding specific operations.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BANLkTikD3W-vQMjDQOCN5uPRT3HQqwWgOg>