From owner-cvs-gnu  Sat Jun 22 12:35:07 1996
Return-Path: owner-cvs-gnu
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id MAA04434
          for cvs-gnu-outgoing; Sat, 22 Jun 1996 12:35:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.19])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id MAA04406;
          Sat, 22 Jun 1996 12:34:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.6.12/8.6.9) id FAA09478; Sun, 23 Jun 1996 05:19:59 +1000
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 1996 05:19:59 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199606221919.FAA09478@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: ache@nagual.ru, wosch@cs.tu-berlin.de
Subject: Re: cvs commit:  src/gnu/usr.bin/man/man Makefile man.c
Cc: CVS-committers@freefall.freebsd.org, bde@zeta.org.au,
        cvs-all@freefall.freebsd.org, cvs-gnu@freefall.freebsd.org
Sender: owner-cvs-gnu@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>KOI8-R writes:
>>> 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, 

>Security, security, security. Principle of least privilege.

In that case, isn't suid man better?  Group man would have to
be able to access exactly the same things as user man does now,
it's easier to make a mistake with a group by putting too many
users in it.

Bruce