Alan M Wright wrote: > On 03/23/09 13:22, Jordan Brown wrote: >> Darren J Moffat wrote: >>> Or - and this is my preferred option - there should be a requirement >>> that the commands be listed in a specific RBAC exec_attr(4) profile >>> and that smbd 'pfexec' them and by default they only run with basic >>> privs (unless the exec_attr(4) profile gives them more. >> >> That sounds like it might be theoretically correct, but it seems like >> a pretty heavyweight thing to ask users to set up. Remember that this >> is a mechanism intended to allow users to plug their own components - >> typically but not necessarily scripts - into the SMB >> connect/disconnect process. > > I thought about that a while ago but was concerned about end > user flexibility. We can take a look at it.
Great, in the mean time can we have the case put in "waiting need spec" please since this is crucial to the architecture. It does provide more flexibility but it also provides more accountability and more security. -- Darren J Moffat
