On 2/25/20 10:25 AM, Dennis Putnam wrote: > So shouldn't 'check_perms -f' have fixed that?
check_perms is not perfect. See below for more. > This is a server used strictly for mailman. There are only 2 users with > access so I am not worried about the caveat in that article. It looks > like you are giving me options and I am not sure what to do now? Either way works, but in your case, I would ensure /var/lib/mailman/archives/private is group mailman and mode is 2771. With this setting, check_perms will say > Warning: Private archive directory is other-executable (o+x). > This could allow other users on your system to read private archives. > If you're on a shared multiuser system, you should consult the > installation manual on how to fix this. which you can ignore. The reason I suggest this is so you don't need to be concerned about the owner of /var/lib/mailman/archives/private -- Mark Sapiro <m...@msapiro.net> The highway is for gamblers, San Francisco Bay Area, California better use your sense - B. Dylan
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------ Mailman-Users mailing list Mailman-Users@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-users Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-users%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-users/archive%40jab.org
