On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 12:18 -0700, Jeff Dooley wrote: > On 8/21/06, Jeff Dooley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 8/20/06, Thomas Bächler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Snarkout schrieb: > > > > I think hal has to be in the storage group as well. I also had to add > > > > myself > > > > and hal to "disk" a while back because auto amounting of my ipod was > > > > broken. > > > > > > Adding yourself to "disk" is a huge security risk, you should never do > > > that with your everyday-work user. > > > > It looks like Varun was able to get his system to work without adding > > his user to disk. But to be clear: hal should be in both the storage > > group and the hal group.(?) > > (just not the normal user due to security risks). > > Duh. Stupid mistake. I meant the storage group and *disk* group.
Running hal as disk group member is just as safe as making it setuid root or something like that. Anything that is member of the disk group can cat your complete harddisk and read anything from the image they create with that. Hal is designed to run as nonprivileged user and runs fine as it does with the groups we assigned it to, even without the disk group it shows all my partitions. _______________________________________________ arch mailing list arch@archlinux.org http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
