From owner-freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 24 09:51:05 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D045316A4CE for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 09:51:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9C8343D1D for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 09:51:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) i4OGoTHG068583 for ; Mon, 24 May 2004 09:50:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id i4OGoTSZ068582; Mon, 24 May 2004 09:50:29 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats) Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 09:50:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200405241650.i4OGoTSZ068582@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-ports-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: rob@debank.tv Subject: Re: ports/67125: Update security/clamav-devel and secure socket X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: rob@debank.tv List-Id: Ports bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 16:51:06 -0000 The following reply was made to PR ports/67125; it has been noted by GNATS. From: rob@debank.tv To: "Oliver Eikemeier" Cc: rob@debank.tv, freebsd-gnats-submit@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ports/67125: Update security/clamav-devel and secure socket Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 18:43:33 +0200 (CEST) > rob@debank.tv wrote: > >>>Rob Evers wrote: >>> >>>>Chmod 770 the socket directory >>> >>>What is the purpose of making the directory group writable and >>>the pid unreadable for other processes? >>> >>>-Oliver >> >> Mmm, I did this because the clamd socket is rwxrwxrwx, so every user on >> the system can read the socket, but I guess this is not a good solution >> ;-) > > Do you want to guard against a local denial-of-service attack, or what is > the problem with that? > > -Oliver > No, but I want to be sure that scanned e-mails can't be read by 'normal' system users. Rob