Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2012 02:59:40 -0500 (CDT) From: Robert Bonomi <bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Help solving the sysadm's nightmare Message-ID: <201207210759.q6L7xeka004536@mail.r-bonomi.com> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1207191010200.7414@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> > Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 10:12:05 +0200 (CEST) > Subject: Re: Help solving the sysadm's nightmare > [[ sarcastic comment with no useful value removed ]] > > it's a mess, and ofcourse everything is "critical" there is no room for > > interruption of service. > > > > Now, I have no idea which processes actually require access to those > > files, what privileges these processes run with and which files are > > actually executable or just plain files. > i can only help you with base system and ports permissions, and /var and > /etc > > just look how it should be Of gourse, setting system/ports permissins back to the way "it should be" WILL re-introduce the problems that were 'solved' by the prior administrator changing permissiona as descrribed, resulting in UNACCEPTABLE interruption of operations -- quote: "Everything is 'critical' there is no room for interruption of service." > > What I know is that lots of files are on samba shares and lots of files > > are used by uniface9 application, but I don't know much about uniface > > or if this is actually executed on the client or on the server. > > look at samba config to check as what user directories are accessed. set > it as such user and chmod 700 is enough. While that "instruction" may have some relevance to _some_ situations, there is *NO* guarantee that, say, multiple users in a given department of the business do _not_ require access to files in the 'user directory' of another employee in that same department. While one can argue -- with some validity -- that things "should not" be that way, one _cannot_ guarantee that such is not the case. ESPECIALLY, given the mind-set of the prior admin(s). Thus, changing permissions 'as directed' _does_ have a definite possibilit of causing unacceptable interruption of critical services. > > So, how can I > > > - determine which users actually need read or write access to these > > files? > > lsof will not help you. Using lsof will *DEFINITELY* _help_ -- in identifying which applications access which files. lsof output will not be comprehensive/complete, because a single lsof run only produces a snapshot of what currentl-running processes have what files open at that time. But it *DOES* provide a 'starting point', a list of the files that the running applications are _proven_ to require access to. Changing permissions on those lsof-identified files, such that the application in question does _not_ have access to it *WILL* break that application. Knowing what -not- to do -- because "doing that thing" _will_ break something -- is a _critical_ part of determining what =can= be done.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201207210759.q6L7xeka004536>