From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 21 19:46:10 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83C2E106568F for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 19:46:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dave.list@pixelhammer.com) Received: from smtp1.tls.net (smtp1.tls.net [65.124.104.104]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EA848FC16 for ; Thu, 21 Jan 2010 19:46:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 13167 invoked from network); 21 Jan 2010 19:46:09 -0000 Received: by simscan 1.2.3 ppid: 13133, pid: 13164, t: 0.1888s scanners: attach: 1.2.3 spam: 3.2.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.1 (2007-05-02) on smtp1.tls.net X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.6 required=7.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,TVD_RCVD_IP autolearn=disabled version=3.2.1 Received: from 64-184-8-201.bb.hrtc.net (HELO ?192.168.1.46?) (ldg@tls.net@64.184.8.201) by ssl-smtp1.tls.net with ESMTPA; 21 Jan 2010 19:46:09 -0000 Message-ID: <4B58AEEB.2010303@pixelhammer.com> Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 14:45:47 -0500 From: DAve User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: 'User Questions' References: <4B588E62.7020604@pixelhammer.com> <20100121195143.b079dc4b.freebsd@edvax.de> <4B58AA2A.3010904@pixelhammer.com> In-Reply-To: <4B58AA2A.3010904@pixelhammer.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: cgiwrap X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 19:46:10 -0000 DAve wrote: > Polytropon wrote: >> On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 12:26:58 -0500, DAve wrote: >>> Anyone using cgiwrap? >> No, so I may just give a quite generic advice, erm, guess. :-) >> >>> I am unable to get it to work. It continues to >>> claim it is not set uid root, but it is. >>> >>> -rwsr-xr-x 2 root nogroup 92396 Jan 21 11:33 cgiwrap >> ^^^^^^^ >> Is "nogroup" intended? Check > > Yes, my apache runs as nobody:nogroup on this server. I had changed it > to root:bin as it was set with sbox, and left it as root:root (as set by > the makefile), no difference. > >> % ls -lno cgiwrap > > -rwsr-xr-x 2 0 65533 - 92396 Jan 21 11:33 cgiwrap > >> for anything untypical for a SUID executable. >> >> Furthermore, it would be helpful to know the full error >> message (if any). > > Sure, "The cgiwrap executable(s) were not made setuid-root. This is > required for it to function properly. (SetUID root is needed in order to > change the uid to that of the script owner. This is an installation > error please make the executable setuid root, or use the 'make install' > method of installing the executables. " > > Which I tried second. First I used the port cgiwrap with the above > result, then I built it myself and got the same error. > > Stumped... > > DAve > > /dev/da1s1d on /data (ufs, local, nosuid, soft-updates) Duh! I did that on purpose when the server was built too. Thanks to Karl for pointing out the obvious to me. My mind is elsewhere today, it is our 24th wedding anniversary. DAve -- "Posterity, you will know how much it cost the present generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in heaven that ever I took half the pains to preserve it." John Adams http://appleseedinfo.org