Good morning,
I´ve got another msec question. I was working on a different
computer on my lan and hadn´t put it´s id in my hosts file on my
server yet. I was lazy and didn´t feel like getting on a system
which had access (for ssh that is) so I was trying different toys
to see which had access.
On Sun, 26 Oct 2003, Michael Holt wrote:
I´ve got another msec question. I was working on a different
computer on my lan and hadn´t put it´s id in my hosts file on my
server yet. I was lazy and didn´t feel like getting on a system
which had access (for ssh that is) so I was trying
On Sunday 26 October 2003 09:33 am, Michael Holt wrote:
Good morning,
I´ve got another msec question. I was working on a different
computer on my lan and hadn´t put it´s id in my hosts file on my
server yet. I was lazy and didn´t feel like getting on a system
which had access (for ssh that
Bill Mullen mused:
I don't run telnet (naturally g), but I'd guess that access to
it is
probably controlled by xinetd, rather than by /etc/hosts.allow. If
that's
the case, you'll have an /etc/xinetd.d/telnet[d] file where this
sort of
thing can be configured. After you've made any changes
Bryan Phinney mused:
I would guess that something is either not configured correctly,
you have
installed some software that has changed the default settings, or
you are
hitting a different machine than you think you are hitting. I
have tried
this on my web server which is also set to msec
Ralph C wrote:
Hi all,
I have Bynari Insight Server installed and it installs everything inside
/opt/is4/ directory as a chroot jail, where it runs it's own services
like Postfix, Apache, Proftpd, etc... msec is changing the permissions.
I need to make msec skip this directory and all sub dirs.
Hi Jack, Thanks for the info.
If I:
edit /etc/security/msec/perm.local
/opt/is4owner.group octalperms
/opt/is4/* owner.group octalperms
then (as per the second line) won't that change the owner.group
octalperms ie. (775 for instance)for all of the sub dirs also?
Remember
On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 07:33, Ralph Crpngeyer wrote:
Hi Jack, Thanks for the info.
If I:
edit /etc/security/msec/perm.local
/opt/is4 owner.group octalperms
/opt/is4/*owner.group octalperms
then (as per the second line) won't that change the owner.group
octalperms
Jack, Your right.
The user.group for the entire jail is root.root only the file
permissions are different. Also looking at /usr/share/msec/perm.5 the
directory /opt is not touched at all. I think that something else must
have been happening. I wasn't the only one with root access to this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
October 23, 2003 09:36 am, Ralph Crpngeyer wrote:
Jack, Your right.
The user.group for the entire jail is root.root only the file
permissions are different. Also looking at /usr/share/msec/perm.5 the
directory /opt is not touched at all. I think
On Thu, 2003-10-23 at 08:36, Ralph Crpngeyer wrote:
Jack, Your right.
The user.group for the entire jail is root.root only the file
permissions are different. Also looking at /usr/share/msec/perm.5 the
directory /opt is not touched at all. I think that something else must
have been
Thanks! I didn't even notice that I fat fingered my name. :-(
Ralph
Charlie M. wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
October 23, 2003 09:36 am, Ralph Crpngeyer wrote:
Jack, Your right.
The user.group for the entire jail is root.root only the file
permissions
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
October 23, 2003 11:46 am, Ralph Crongeyer wrote:
Thanks! I didn't even notice that I fat fingered my name. :-(
Ralph
I think we all have those brain fart moments, don't we? My latest one was my
son's e-mail address yesterday. I had him
Hi all,
I have Bynari Insight Server installed and it installs everything inside
/opt/is4/ directory as a chroot jail, where it runs it's own services
like Postfix, Apache, Proftpd, etc... msec is changing the permissions.
I need to make msec skip this directory and all sub dirs. How do I do
Hi all,
I have Bynari Insight Server installed and it installs everything inside
/opt/is4/ directory as a chroot jail, where it runs it's own services
like Postfix, Apache, Proftpd, etc... msec is changing the permissions.
I need to make msec skip this directory and all sub dirs. How do I do
On Wed, 2003-10-22 at 18:37, Ralph C wrote:
Hi all,
I have Bynari Insight Server installed and it installs everything inside
/opt/is4/ directory as a chroot jail, where it runs it's own services
like Postfix, Apache, Proftpd, etc... msec is changing the permissions.
I need to make msec
On Sunday 19 October 2003 11:25 pm, Michael Holt wrote:
Ok, I´ve read all the posts I could find and it looks like no one
has had any luck with msec? I´ve been doing fine forever at
´high´ security; now a friend from work is dogging me about making
things more secure. Since he´s an m$ guy, I
Bryan Phinney mused:
Msec level 4 denies everything by default. Therefore, you must
explicitly
allow the things that you want to allow in the hosts.allow file.
This will
override the hosts.deny file so that anything that is not allowed
is denied.
I had the same problem with my web
On Monday 20 October 2003 07:30 am, Michael Holt wrote:
Yeah, that makes sense. I was reading different posts on HOW to
allow things though, and trying to find which way would stick
which was confusing. I put ´All: All´ in my allow file just so I
can make it work and I found a sample allow
Wow! Thanks for all the help Bryan! I´m going to go through the
list and see what I can start implementing. Yeah, I do have a
hardware router with port forwarding setup. I´m going to start
playing with those other tools you mentioned.
Thanks again
--
Michael Holt
Snohomish, WA
Ok, I´ve read all the posts I could find and it looks like no one
has had any luck with msec? I´ve been doing fine forever at
´high´ security; now a friend from work is dogging me about making
things more secure. Since he´s an m$ guy, I want to prove how
much better *nix can do things and so I
On Sun, 2003-10-19 at 20:25, Michael Holt wrote:
Ok, I´ve read all the posts I could find and it looks like no one
has had any luck with msec? I´ve been doing fine forever at
´high´ security; now a friend from work is dogging me about making
things more secure. Since he´s an m$ guy, I want
Jack Coates mused:
Start by read the /usr/share/msec/perm.* files, then apply changes
to
/etc/security/perm.local.
Next, did you know that all the msec stuff is in script? Read it,
quite
enlightening. /usr/sbin/msec is the wrapper that figures out what
to do,
then calls python and bash
Hi,
This question started actually in the newbie mailing list but it may be
more appropriate for the expert list.
I setup my machine with security level 4 but I am interested in
relaxing some of the permission settings. I made changes to
/etc/security/msec/perm.local and then executed msec.
On Mon, 2003-09-01 at 20:11, Avi Schwartz wrote:
Hi,
This question started actually in the newbie mailing list but it may be
more appropriate for the expert list.
I setup my machine with security level 4 but I am interested in
relaxing some of the permission settings. I made changes to
On Monday, Sep 1, 2003, at 22:55 America/Chicago, Jack Coates wrote:
On Mon, 2003-09-01 at 20:11, Avi Schwartz wrote:
Hi,
This question started actually in the newbie mailing list but it may
be
more appropriate for the expert list.
I setup my machine with security level 4 but I am interested
On Mon, 2003-09-01 at 21:06, Avi Schwartz wrote:
...
puzzling. Seems like a bug -- I can only assume that I've made my
changes manually and then altered perm.local so they'll stick,
otherwise
I should have seen this too.
Then there is something else going on since I also did the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello all,
I've just installed qmail on my mdk91. It was a success.
However, a few minutes later i found this in /var/log/messages:
Jul 11 13:01:01 mdk91 msec: changed mode of /usr/sbin/sendmail from 755 to 711
Jul 11 13:01:01 mdk91 msec: changed
On September 1993 plus 3599 days James Sparenberg wrote:
On Thu, 2003-07-10 at 23:05, Fajar Priyanto wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello all,
I've just installed qmail on my mdk91. It was a success.
However, a few minutes later i found this in /var/log/messages:
On Thu, 2003-07-10 at 23:05, Fajar Priyanto wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello all,
I've just installed qmail on my mdk91. It was a success.
However, a few minutes later i found this in /var/log/messages:
Jul 11 13:01:01 mdk91 msec: changed mode of
On 07 Mar 2003 19:56:21 -0800 Jack Coates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 17:25, Pierre Fortin wrote:
...
In this case, I *want* 700... no sane automated security system
should ever *reduce* security levels setup by the owner... it's
downright nasty IMNSHO...
...
rant
On Sat, 2003-03-08 at 07:08, Pierre Fortin wrote:
...
buckled tighter than NORAD.
Funny you should mention NORAD... from '64 to '71, I worked in NORAD HQ
(Canada) deep under the mountain... so I have my own opinions about how
thight NORAD is... can't say any more... :
I actually
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On March 7, 2003 19:33 pm, Pierre Fortin wrote:
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 12:09:20 -0600 (CST) J.P. Pasnak
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pierre Fortin said:
SIGH... I recently noticed that all my users' home directories
had 755 permissions...
On 08 Mar 2003 08:02:07 -0800 Jack Coates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2003-03-08 at 07:08, Pierre Fortin wrote:
...
buckled tighter than NORAD.
Funny you should mention NORAD... from '64 to '71, I worked in NORAD
HQ(Canada) deep under the mountain... so I have my own opinions
On Sat, 8 Mar 2003 10:03:07 -0600 J.P. Pasnak
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On March 7, 2003 19:33 pm, Pierre Fortin wrote:
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 12:09:20 -0600 (CST) J.P. Pasnak
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pierre Fortin said:
SIGH... I
On Sat, 2003-03-08 at 08:30, Pierre Fortin wrote:
...
the matrix idea requires the administrator to first learn the matrix,
second agree or disagree with it, and third make adjustments in
perm.local. Absence of a matrix requires the administrator to make all
the decisions from scratch.
On Sat, 2003-03-08 at 08:02, Jack Coates wrote:
On Sat, 2003-03-08 at 07:08, Pierre Fortin wrote:
...
buckled tighter than NORAD.
Funny you should mention NORAD... from '64 to '71, I worked in NORAD HQ
(Canada) deep under the mountain... so I have my own opinions about how
thight
On 08 Mar 2003 08:47:28 -0800 Jack Coates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2003-03-08 at 08:30, Pierre Fortin wrote:
...
the matrix idea requires the administrator to first learn the
matrix, second agree or disagree with it, and third make adjustments
in perm.local. Absence of a matrix
SIGH... I recently noticed that all my users' home directories had 755
permissions... changed this to 700 and now it's back to 755... What's
the point of separate userids if msec allows each user to read another's
directory??
Will there be a more secure default in 9.1...? If not, then I
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 09:23, Pierre Fortin wrote:
SIGH... I recently noticed that all my users' home directories had 755
permissions... changed this to 700 and now it's back to 755... What's
the point of separate userids if msec allows each user to read another's
directory??
Will there
Pierre Fortin said:
SIGH... I recently noticed that all my users' home directories had 755
permissions... changed this to 700 and now it's back to 755... What's
the point of separate userids if msec allows each user to read another's
directory??
Will there be a more secure default in
On 07 Mar 2003 09:42:49 -0800 Jack Coates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jack, Thanks for the info... but I just gotta rant about msec... :
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 09:23, Pierre Fortin wrote:
SIGH... I recently noticed that all my users' home directories had
755 permissions... changed this to
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 12:09:20 -0600 (CST) J.P. Pasnak
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pierre Fortin said:
SIGH... I recently noticed that all my users' home directories had
755 permissions... changed this to 700 and now it's back to 755...
What's the point of separate userids if msec allows
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 17:25, Pierre Fortin wrote:
...
In this case, I *want* 700... no sane automated security system should
ever *reduce* security levels setup by the owner... it's downright nasty
IMNSHO...
...
rant
msec should check existing permissions when run; if they are tighter than
On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 19:56, Jack Coates wrote:
...
I do agree with you, but I also see Mandrake's point and I think that
this comes from several distros of telling people that a workstation OS
clearly not intended as a server should be using levels 4 and 5 and
buckled tighter than NORAD.
All;
Ok, I'm ready to dump the whole thing in the bay. I have a server gone
mad.
After a power failure, the server came back in a very unstable state. So
far, any efforts to fix it, seem to only make it worse. Every time I
think I have it fixed, something else seems to go wrong.
As it stands,
On Sun, Jan 12, 2003 at 09:08:41PM -0500, Mark Weaver wrote:
On Sunday 12 January 2003 08:42 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] scribbled incoherently:
All;
Ok, I'm ready to dump the whole thing in the bay. I have a server gone
mad.
After a power failure, the server came back in a very unstable
On Sun, Jan 12, 2003 at 09:36:39PM -0500, Mark Weaver wrote:
On Sunday 12 January 2003 09:25 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] scribbled incoherently:
Hi Ric,
The very first thing I'd do is turn PS completely off. Better yet...just
take the little bugger outa there cause in the long run that app
On Sun, 2003-01-12 at 21:36, Mark Weaver wrote:
On Sunday 12 January 2003 09:25 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] scribbled incoherently:
Hi Ric,
The very first thing I'd do is turn PS completely off. Better yet...just
take the little bugger outa there cause in the long run that app is more
On Sunday 12 January 2003 08:42 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] scribbled incoherently:
All;
Ok, I'm ready to dump the whole thing in the bay. I have a server gone
mad.
After a power failure, the server came back in a very unstable state. So
far, any efforts to fix it, seem to only make it worse.
On Sunday 12 January 2003 09:25 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] scribbled incoherently:
Hi Ric,
The very first thing I'd do is turn PS completely off. Better yet...just
take the little bugger outa there cause in the long run that app is more
trouble at times then it's worth. Once that thing isn't
On Sunday 12 January 2003 10:12 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] scribbled incoherently:
Ok...just to make sure, do a restart on both the Postfix service and the
xinetd service to ensure they're running. This is usually the #1 cause of
that particular error message when trying to connect to the imap
I was wondering how to customize my msec 3 security settings.The instructions
in man mseclib are a little vague.Specifically I would like to enable
PROMISC_CHECK=yes in level 3.Thanx.
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Michael Shinobi a.k.a. 'alfalfa'
Mandrake 8.2
Kernel-2.4.18-8.1mdk
Linux
I could use some help with msec. I found in the documentation how
you can use the /etc/security/msec/perm.local file to allow for
modifying permissions of a file. My problem is with modifying a file.
I've got a firewall running at security level 3. I want to modify some
files like
On Sun, 2002-11-03 at 06:11, . wrote:
I could use some help with msec. I found in the documentation how
you can use the /etc/security/msec/perm.local file to allow for
modifying permissions of a file. My problem is with modifying a file.
I've got a firewall running at security level
On Sunday 03 November 2002 11:54 am, Jack Coates wrote:
On Sun, 2002-11-03 at 06:11, . wrote:
I could use some help with msec. I found in the documentation how
you can use the /etc/security/msec/perm.local file to allow for
modifying permissions of a file. My problem is with modifying
Gregory K. Meyer wrote:
On Sunday 03 November 2002 11:54 am, Jack Coates wrote:
On Sun, 2002-11-03 at 06:11, . wrote:
I could use some help with msec. I found in the documentation how
you can use the /etc/security/msec/perm.local file to allow for
modifying
Never mind ... I have it working on one of my machines, so now I just
have to figure out what I did so it will work on the other one. I'll post
the answer when I have it, in case anyone else has the same problems.
BTW ... here's the changes I made to /etc/init.d/sendmail. Running "sendmail
On Sun, 2002-11-03 at 09:52, Gregory K. Meyer wrote:
On Sunday 03 November 2002 11:54 am, Jack Coates wrote:
On Sun, 2002-11-03 at 06:11, . wrote:
I could use some help with msec. I found in the documentation how
you can use the /etc/security/msec/perm.local file to allow for
On Sunday 03 November 2002 01:54 pm, . wrote:
Right, and that makes a /etc/security/perm.local file, right? This
/etc/security/msec/local
is a firewall, so it has no gui, but I created that file manually. I
put the /etc/syslog.conf file in the perm.local file with it's original
Hi,
just came back from a trip to the Mandrake newsgroup and I'm still in
terror! I read a thread about the default behaviour of msec concerning
the permissions of home directories.
So I made a fresh install of MDK 8.2 from the boxed version with sec
level 'Standard', created 2 dummy users (joe
An exceptional analysis of the situation. Security being a tool which is
generally overlooked. Having gotten used to the lax security, I was shocked
to find that the items I've gotten used to were now eliminated for Security
reasons.
Certainly this is a step forward.
Wolfgang Bornath wrote:
On Monday 10 June 2002 08:04 am, you wrote:
Hi,
just came back from a trip to the Mandrake newsgroup and I'm still in
terror! I read a thread about the default behaviour of msec concerning
the permissions of home directories.
So I made a fresh install of MDK 8.2 from the boxed version with
On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, Wolfgang Bornath wrote:
Hi,
just came back from a trip to the Mandrake newsgroup and I'm still in
terror! I read a thread about the default behaviour of msec concerning
the permissions of home directories.
So I made a fresh install of MDK 8.2 from the boxed version
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 15:21 -0400, et wrote:
On Monday 10 June 2002 08:04 am, you wrote:
[snip]
Here you go! Isn't that the state of permissions which should have been
there from the start? My experiment just tells the same as what I read in
the newsgroup: Although sec level 'Standard'
If there is no origianl message included in theis rely, i apologize...reply is doing
funny things today. Anyway, this is a reply to etharp's last post:
Yes, the default mandrake security settings are far more secure than windoze, or most
other OS's. Not only can joe and joeanne not install
On Monday 10 June 2002 04:56 pm, you wrote:
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 15:21 -0400, et wrote:
On Monday 10 June 2002 08:04 am, you wrote:
[snip]
Here you go! Isn't that the state of permissions which should have been
there from the start? My experiment just tells the same as what I read
Summary: When msec is run (at 4:03 am) it seems to trigger a kernel panic.
I have also got the same kernel panic when shutting down, right after Alsa
has been stopped.
In either case, when this happens, I have to resort to the SysRq sequence.
This seems to be related to the zip drive:
# uname
I'm using LM 8.2 (new install), and running several mailing list. At
msec 3 4 I am continually having to reset the /home/mailman perms back
to 02775. Does anyone have a suggestion on how I can stop the madness?
--
Albert E. Whale - CISSP
http://www.abs-comptech.com
I'm not sure of the exact file, since I'm not running a mailing list,
and don't have a /home/mailman.
However, if I were you, I'd look at the msec config files in
/usr/share/msec
Just a thought. I may be wrong.
Ric
On Sun, 2002-06-02 at 08:49, Albert E. Whale wrote:
I'm using LM 8.2 (new
At 10:45 AM 6/2/02, you wrote:
I'm not sure of the exact file, since I'm not running a mailing list,
and don't have a /home/mailman.
However, if I were you, I'd look at the msec config files in
/usr/share/msec
Just a thought. I may be wrong.
Ric
On Sun, 2002-06-02 at 08:49, Albert E. Whale
On Sun, 02 Jun 2002 11:11:26 -0400
David Relson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 10:45 AM 6/2/02, you wrote:
I'm not sure of the exact file, since I'm not running a mailing list,
and don't have a /home/mailman.
However, if I were you, I'd look at the msec config files in
/usr/share/msec
Just
Brian wrote:
Msec doesn't seem to always honor that level.local file which makes it
especially difficult to set the security settings you desire.
--
It works just fine on my system (LMDK8.2). Take a look at the Mandrake
page for instructions. You might want to look at the creation of a
On Sun, 02 Jun 2002 10:51:33 -0500
J. Craig Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brian wrote:
Msec doesn't seem to always honor that level.local file which makes it
especially difficult to set the security settings you desire.
--
It works just fine on my system (LMDK8.2). Take a look
I'm using LM 8.2 (new install), and running several mailing list. I
have grown to like MailMan, a GNU tool.
At msec 3 4 I am continually having to reset the /home/mailman perms
back to 02775. Does anyone have a suggestion on how I can stop the
madness? I have already tried the
On June 2, 2002 23:24, Albert E. Whale wrote:
I'm using LM 8.2 (new install), and running several mailing list. I
have grown to like MailMan, a GNU tool.
At msec 3 4 I am continually having to reset the /home/mailman perms
back to 02775. Does anyone have a suggestion on how I can stop the
Hi
When cron.hourly is run on my machine, I get an email telling me:-
msec: unable to parse chage output
This seems to be generated from /usr/share/msec/libmsec.py after trying to:
cmd = '/usr/bin/chage -M %d -I %d %s' % (max, inactive, entry[0])
ret = commands.getstatusoutput(cmd)
I
At 06:24 AM 5/6/02, Dave Naylor wrote:
Hi
When cron.hourly is run on my machine, I get an email telling me:-
msec: unable to parse chage output
This seems to be generated from /usr/share/msec/libmsec.py after trying to:
cmd = '/usr/bin/chage -M %d -I %d %s' % (max, inactive, entry[0])
ret =
Hi
On Monday 06 May 2002 12:18, David Relson wrote:
msec: unable to parse chage output
This issue has been addressed here and a patch was posted to this
list. There's a mismatch between new user entries created by webmin, how
chage processes the entries, and how msec processes the output
I have a single machine, no local network, with a broadband
(cable modem) connection. Using msec,level 3, which uses a default
umask of 022.
Is there any reason to create a perm.local file rather than
simply edit the settings in the /usr/share/msec/perm.xx files? I want
to
Greetings,
I've noticed that when I build from a src.rpm, there are a lot of files
with user and group ids which are not valid for my system. For example,
ntp-4.1.1-1mdk.src.rpm gives me files with user 427 and group 6011. While
I don't really mind these files, msec _will_ complain and
Greetings,
With msec set to level 3 and above, RPM_CHECK is turned on. This caused
rpm -V to run, which isn't a bad thing.
However, the kernel-sources package contains several hundred generated
files. ALL of these files show up as changes on my system since I have
compiled my own kernel.
Damian wrote:
El vie, 05-04-2002 a las 12:56, David Relson escribió:
The word
Writeable is incorrectly spelled. It should be Writable.
i'm sure when i get hacked, the hacker will correct the typos in my
world-writable files ;oP
see ya.
Damian
actually, it would be more correct to
At 01:57 AM 4/6/02, you wrote:
Damian wrote:
El vie, 05-04-2002 a las 12:56, David Relson escribió:
The word
Writeable is incorrectly spelled. It should be Writable.
i'm sure when i get hacked, the hacker will correct the typos in my
world-writable files ;oP
see ya.
Damian
David Relson wrote:
You got me! I expressed it poorly. I think I wanted 'Writeable' is an
incorrect spelling
lol. i guess that is why what is said about hind and foresight.
anyway, if you keep a sharp eye, you will note that there are other
progs that have 'typos'.
tc,hago.
g
.
--
Greetings,
msec says Security Warning: World Writeable files found : at the
beginning of thee messages it logs to /var/log/boot.log. The word
Writeable is incorrectly spelled. It should be Writable.
David
David Relson
At 11:18 AM 4/5/02, you wrote:
Or better yet, is there a way to get the security check to ignore sockets
(which most of these are)?
Below is a patch that excludes sockets (and also replaces a numeric value
by the proper named constant (MACRO)). Hopefully it can get added to 8.2
and cooker.
El vie, 05-04-2002 a las 12:56, David Relson escribió:
Greetings,
msec says Security Warning: World Writeable files found : at the
beginning of thee messages it logs to /var/log/boot.log. The word
Writeable is incorrectly spelled. It should be Writable.
David
i'm sure when i get
Greetings,
If I used webmin to add a user, the next time msec runs it complains:
msec: unable to parse chage output
I took a look at why this happens and found a fix, which is shown
below. This fix has already made it into cooker. Any chance of an 8.2 update?
Thanks.
David
--- On Thu 03/28, Rob Gillen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you aren't sure which kernel you are using, trying running 'uname
> -r' on the command line. You are using the secure kernel if it turns up
> 2.4.18-6mdk-secure. If msec doesn't change it, then it may have been an
>
--- On Wed 03/27, Rob Gillen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I may be wrong, but it probably has something to do with Mandrake >using
> the secure kernel. It removes some userspace functionality for >safety.
I booted into the enterprise kernel though... And the changes from higher to high
Is there any very detailed document explaining what changes happen when
switching security levels in msec?
This may help:
http://www.mandrakesecure.net/en/docs/msec.php
--
Tim C
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
If you aren't sure which kernel you are using, trying running 'uname
-r' on the command line. You are using the secure kernel if it turns up
2.4.18-6mdk-secure. If msec doesn't change it, then it may have been an
installation thing.
gikoreno wrote:
--- On Wed 03/27, Rob Gillen wrote:
Hi everyone,
I just checked the newbie and expert lists, and couldn't find anything that answered this question...
I just installed Mandrake 8.2, but kept my previous Mdk 8.1 /home partition. I used to have xsane working, and I ran scannerdrake and I can't seem to get the scanner working
Thanks a lot, this was due to an error in the config file and also a domain
name problem.
With root@localhost everything works fine now.
Francois
At 16:54 23/02/02 +0100, you wrote:
Look in /etc/security/msec/security.conf
Maybe this update has corrupted or changed this config file.
In this
I think this a _really_ a MDK question...
-- Message transmis --
Subject: [expert] msec mail
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 14:35:54 +0100
From: FL [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi!
I was used to receive mail from the cron.daily check made by msec.
For a few weeks
El sáb, 23-02-2002 a las 10:52, FL escribió:
I think this a _really_ a MDK question...
-- Message transmis --
Subject: [expert] msec mail
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 14:35:54 +0100
From: FL [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi!
I was used to receive mail
Of course the mail system is running on two servers without any problems.
Because this is the same situation on two MDK box I'm running.
I really think it has been done via an update, but don't know wich one.
Francois
Le Samedi 23 Février 2002 11:18, Oscar a écrit :
El sáb, 23-02-2002 a las
Look in /etc/security/msec/security.conf
Maybe this update has corrupted or changed this config file.
In this file you should find:
MAIL_WARN=yes
MAIL_USER=root
And you must look in /etc/postfix/aliases to see who is receiving the
root mail.
Saludos
óscar.
El sáb, 23-02-2002 a las 13:42, FL
Hi!
I was used to receive mail from the cron.daily check made by msec.
For a few weeks : nothing happens, I can read the msec messages in
/var/log, but no mail at all.
Any idea ?
Francois
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
1 - 100 of 108 matches
Mail list logo
