Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 20 Aug 2004 09:18:27 -0500
From:      Dan Nelson <dnelson@allantgroup.com>
To:        Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@des.no>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: suid bit sshd
Message-ID:  <20040820141827.GD8165@dan.emsphone.com>
In-Reply-To: <xzpy8ka3yco.fsf@dwp.des.no>
References:  <200408131332.09164.ilkerozupak@yahoo.com> <20040813104934.GL87690@submonkey.net> <200408131436.12750.ilkerozupak@yahoo.com> <20040813153607.GF4198@dan.emsphone.com> <20040820114001.R28976@mp2.macomnet.net> <xzpy8ka3yco.fsf@dwp.des.no>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In the last episode (Aug 20), Dag-Erling Smorgrav said:
> Maxim Konovalov <maxim@macomnet.ru> writes:
> > DES, is it OK to commit a following patch?  Or you were going to
> > deprecate ENABLE_SUID_SSH?  We still have it in make.conf(5),
> > share/examples/etc/make.conf and ssh-keysign/Makefile.
> 
> The whole point with ssh-keysign is to separate out the parts of ssh
> that need a setuid bit.  It should not be necessary for ssh to have a
> setuid bit if ssh-keysign does, which is what ENABLE_SUID_SSH
> controls these days.

ssh-keysign doesn't yet handle SSH 1 keys, though, and a non-root ssh
can't use UsePrivilegedPort which may be needed for
RhostsRSAAuthentication with older servers.  If you're only using SSH-2
keys, and you're only talking to new sshds, then no, you don't need
ENABLE_SUID_SSH.

-- 
	Dan Nelson
	dnelson@allantgroup.com



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040820141827.GD8165>