From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 14 15:17:13 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B6EC16A4CE; Mon, 14 Jun 2004 15:17:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.elvandar.org (cust.94.120.adsl.cistron.nl [195.64.94.120]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C416243D58; Mon, 14 Jun 2004 15:17:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from remko@elvandar.org) Received: from [10.0.3.124] (aragorn.lan.elvandar.intranet [10.0.3.124]) by mail.elvandar.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CFF310689D; Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:16:52 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <40CDC165.4030107@elvandar.org> Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 17:16:53 +0200 From: Remko Lodder X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bruce M Simpson References: <20040518160517.GA10067@therub.org> <20040520033024.GA26640@therub.org> <20040606233720.F1850@ync.qbhto.arg> <20040607204149.GC75747@blossom.cjclark.org> <20040609050217.Q5839@ync.qbhto.arg> <20040609145223.GA53862@blossom.cjclark.org> <20040614113858.GA13028@empiric.dek.spc.org> In-Reply-To: <20040614113858.GA13028@empiric.dek.spc.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at elvandar.org cc: "freebsd-security@freebsd.org" cc: Doug Barton cc: "David E. Meier" cc: cjclark@alum.mit.edu cc: Dan Rue Subject: Re: [Freebsd-security] Re: Multi-User Security X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Security issues [members-only posting] List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 15:17:13 -0000 Bruce M Simpson wrote: > On Wed, Jun 09, 2004 at 07:52:23AM -0700, Crist J. Clark wrote: > >>To do scp-only, you either need (a) a hacked up sshd(8) daemon, (b) a >>jailed environment, or (c) a special shell for the user that only allows >>scp(1) to run. The funny thing is, I think (c) is probably the easiest >>to implement on a mass scale, but seems to be the option most seldom >>considered. > > > ports/shells/scponly > > BMS Bruce, Indeed that is what i said as well :-) Cheers! -- Kind regards, Remko Lodder |remko@elvandar.org Reporter DSINet |remko@dsinet.org Projectleader Mostly-Harmless |remko@mostly-harmless.nl