Date: Sat, 22 Jun 1996 19:55:06 +0400 (MSD) From: =?KOI8-R?Q?=E1=CE=C4=D2=C5=CA_=FE=C5=D2=CE=CF=D7?= (Andrey A. Chernov) <ache@nagual.ru> To: wosch@cs.tu-berlin.de Cc: bde@zeta.org.au, CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-gnu@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/gnu/usr.bin/man/man Makefile man.c Message-ID: <199606221555.TAA02217@nagual.ru> In-Reply-To: <199606221143.NAA00457@campa.panke.de> from "Wolfram Schneider" at "Jun 22, 96 01:43:22 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[Charset ISO-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...] > Bruce Evans writes: > >> Modified: gnu/usr.bin/man/man Makefile man.c > >> Log: > >> Close security holes and restore suid bit > >> Restore writting cat's functionality > > > >> Revision Changes Path > >> 1.16 +2 -0 src/gnu/usr.bin/man/man/Makefile > >> 1.15 +123 -46 src/gnu/usr.bin/man/man/man.c > > > >This should have been reviewed. > > I thought the general consensus was a sgid man, not suid. I don't see how sgid man can be better than suid man now, but I see that sgid man requires additional changes in the permissions and man utils. I don't hear that it is general consensus too. -- Andrey A. Chernov <ache@nagual.ru> http://www.nagual.ru/~ache/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199606221555.TAA02217>