Date: Fri, 06 Aug 1999 13:51:23 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za> To: alk@pobox.com Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: group bits Message-ID: <26425.933940283@axl.noc.iafrica.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 05 Aug 1999 16:34:05 EST." <14249.52685.50332.808817@avalon.east>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[ Hijacked from freebsd-security ] On Thu, 05 Aug 1999 16:34:05 EST, Anthony Kimball wrote: > Is it true, as I believe, that group rwx bits are the principal > correct and appropriate mechanism to allow a specific group of users > to control aspects of system administration which are protected from > control by the body of users at large? Principle, yes. Correct, very often. Appropriate, depends. You can go _very_ far with correct permissions and ownerships. > My specific motivation is that everytime I cvsup, I have to patch > sendmail and ppp to suppress their group-writable-config > errors/warnings. *bing* That's your problem. If you're making changes to your source tree, use CVS. Oh, and this doesn't belong in freebsd-security. :-) Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?26425.933940283>