From owner-freebsd-current Wed Oct 30 22:07:18 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id WAA01241 for current-outgoing; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:07:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from quagmire.ki.net (root@quagmire.ki.net [205.150.102.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA01234 for ; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:07:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (scrappy@localhost) by quagmire.ki.net (8.8.2/8.7.5) with SMTP id BAA16250; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 01:05:30 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 01:05:30 -0500 (EST) From: "Marc G. Fournier" To: Terry Lambert cc: Garrett Wollman , jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: /var/mail (was: re: Help, permission problems...) In-Reply-To: <199610310015.RAA24436@phaeton.artisoft.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Wed, 30 Oct 1996, Terry Lambert wrote: > > < said: > > > [flamage deleted] > > > > I suggest that people just drop this. Crispin is a well-known flamer > > and is not likely to be swayed by anyone else's idea of the Right > > Thing. > > He is also the principle author (apparently) of IMAP4, a highly > desirable piece of software for anyone with a 1995 or later mail > client. > Agreed...which is why I brought this whole discussion into here... From what Mark has said, about the only way I can think of for getting this *obvious* security bug fixed is to, either: a) get other OS system administrators to complain about the security hole opened up by 1777 b) talk to the guy that signs his paycheck, since he has already stated once something to the effect that if he were to change the code, those that pay his check would be breathing down his neck... 3 years ago, I stopped supporting Elm and supported IMAP/Pine *because* I no longer had to worry about the possibility of file corruption associated with dealing with NFS-mounted mail spools. IMHO...what having .lock locking capabilities in IMAP4 is doing is encouraging system administrators to use NFS mounted mail spools, instead of *teaching* system administrators to *not* setup their systems that way... Marc G. Fournier scrappy@ki.net Systems Administrator @ ki.net scrappy@freebsd.org