From owner-freebsd-security  Wed Jul  9 09:58:59 1997
Return-Path: <owner-security>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id JAA24636
          for security-outgoing; Wed, 9 Jul 1997 09:58:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bitbox.follo.net (eivind@bitbox.follo.net [194.198.43.36])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA24629
          for <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 9 Jul 1997 09:58:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) id SAA00433; Wed, 9 Jul 1997 18:58:08 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 18:58:08 +0200 (CEST)
Message-Id: <199707091658.SAA00433@bitbox.follo.net>
From: Eivind Eklund <perhaps@yes.no>
To: Robert Watson <robert@cyrus.watson.org>
CC: adam@homeport.org, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG, tech@openbsd.org
In-reply-to: Robert Watson's message of Tue, 8 Jul 1997 11:45:57 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Security Model/Target for FreeBSD or 4.4?
References: <199707080110.VAA21941@homeport.org>
	<Pine.BSF.3.95q.970708113714.4712A-100000@cyrus.watson.org>
Sender: owner-security@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> With regards to gid vs. uid -- is either one of this preferable for any
> particular reason?  gid may be more flexible, I guess, as it would allow
> multiple users to bind the same ports, but without having rights to each
> others processes, and as such allow a simpler minimum configuration.

GIDs are (always?) preferable, as they don't allow overwrite of other
programs with the same setgid.  They don't even allow overwrite of the
same program, come to think of it :)
(Ref: `man' exploits)

Eivind.