Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 23 May 2010 07:57:36 +0400
From:      Anonymous <swell.k@gmail.com>
To:        RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Users and groups kept after a port deinstallation
Message-ID:  <86d3wnxob3.fsf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20100523021135.7e5dbb4f@gumby.homeunix.com> (RW's message of "Sun, 23 May 2010 02:11:35 %2B0100")
References:  <AANLkTindTvyrfPRj_cGWUC3LXWI63bGN5azaXo_xYRVu@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikNB0LbKG1qtL90F-thxeCvvSqnBxOCCDSucVS6@mail.gmail.com> <20100522005313.26dcfbdb@gumby.homeunix.com> <AANLkTim9NqCGi_iPMuoivw0z2bzEXHkt39VPk6c7aHyt@mail.gmail.com> <4BF787E2.9010907@dataix.net> <20100522120815.063975ae@gumby.homeunix.com> <4BF7C6EE.3010001@dataix.net> <20100522134212.3d5447a8@gumby.homeunix.com> <4BF7FB7D.1010501@dataix.net> <20100522235425.1ab2c504@gumby.homeunix.com> <86aarr8q0m.fsf@gmail.com> <20100523021135.7e5dbb4f@gumby.homeunix.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> writes:

> On Sun, 23 May 2010 03:39:53 +0400
> Anonymous <swell.k@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> RW <rwmaillists@googlemail.com> writes:
>> 
>> > On Sat, 22 May 2010 11:42:53 -0400
>> > jhell <jhell@dataix.net> wrote:
>> >> This is more of a best practices case than what the implications of
>> >> leaving users in the master.passwd are.
>> >
>> > Why is it best practice? Why add extra complexity to solve a problem
>> > that doesn't actually exist?
>> 
>> Such unused entries in passwd add clutter. It in turn makes managing
>> users more complex. You have to remember which users are created by
>> you and which ones are created by ports. 
>
> You don't have to remember, just look at the UID/GID values, ordinary
> users start at 1001, ports create UIDs < 1000.

You're presuming non-ordinary users are created only by ports framework.
That's not always the case. I may want for example a separate user for
telnetd to broadcast ascii movies or youterm sessions. ;)

Besides, some ports do not create users by default but may use them if
available, e.g. dns/dnsmasq & dnsmasq user. This case is more like a
bug, though.

>
> The base system alone creates 18 such users, if you have problems with
> this kind of thing a few stale uids are the least of your problems.
>

>> So, if you change home dir
>> of some user there may be undesireble consequences. And only then
>> security becomes a concern because port app may be run with
>> privilegies that are higher than intended.
>
> This appears to refer to an admin confusing a normal user with a
> system user that's still in use by a port, so I don't see the
> relevance.

No. It's about conflict: system user created by admin and system user
created by port happen to have same username.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86d3wnxob3.fsf>