From owner-freebsd-security Sun Jun 9 08:46:36 1996 Return-Path: owner-security Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA01281 for security-outgoing; Sun, 9 Jun 1996 08:46:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from precipice.shockwave.com (precipice.shockwave.com [171.69.108.33]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA01262 for ; Sun, 9 Jun 1996 08:46:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shockwave.com (localhost.shockwave.com [127.0.0.1]) by precipice.shockwave.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA10038; Sun, 9 Jun 1996 08:44:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606091544.IAA10038@precipice.shockwave.com> To: Ade Barkah cc: taob@io.org (Brian Tao), security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD's /var/mail permissions In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 09 Jun 1996 03:54:15 MDT." <199606090954.DAA11025@hemi.com> Date: Sun, 09 Jun 1996 08:44:44 -0700 From: Paul Traina Sender: owner-security@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk I've just restored the old behavior as part of qpop2.2. I think going to /var/mail is useless given that chown() is restricted. From: Ade Barkah Subject: Re: FreeBSD's /var/mail permissions Brian Tao wrote: > On Fri, 7 Jun 1996, Karl Denninger, MCSNet wrote: > > > > Does this mean we should give up on using mail? > > No, it means you keep mail on a separate machine and manipulate > your mailbox through a server like POP3 or IMAP. But this is what started the thread, right ? With the current scheme qpop 2.2 will not work with FreeBSD; at least not for new users (it doesn't have enough permissions to set up the per-mailbox lock file.) -Ade ------------------------------------------------------------------- Inet: mbarkah@hemi.com - HEMISPHERE ONLINE - -------------------------------------------------------------------