2012/6/6 Pawel Jakub Dawidek :
> Any privileged daemon is much bigger threat. Also, do we really want a
> daemon running all the time just to be able to parse utx files?
Well, if you think of it, it's not a very strange idea:
- You can simply get rid of /var/run/utx.active. There's no need for
th
2012/6/5 Jilles Tjoelker :
> To avoid this, the utmpx APIs could communicate with a privileged daemon
> if the files are not readable. The daemon can check the identity of the
> caller via getpeereid(3).
+1. I would really like to have something like this. Another advantage
of this approach would
On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 01:20:12PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 11:31:01PM +0200, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> > Also, the attack surface of such a daemon may be smaller than that of a
> > setuid/setgid program.
> Really? I don't see that. With current patch and setgid t
On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 11:31:01PM +0200, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> Also, the attack surface of such a daemon may be smaller than that of a
> setuid/setgid program.
Really? I don't see that. With current patch and setgid to utmp the
process can only read some files that don't even contain very sens
On 6/5/2012 4:31 PM, Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> To avoid this, the utmpx APIs could communicate with a privileged daemon
> if the files are not readable. The daemon can check the identity of the
> caller via getpeereid(3). (Unfortunately, even if getpeereid() is
> bypassed and LOCAL_PEERCRED called d
On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 08:42:04PM -0500, Bryan Drewery wrote:
> I've written up a patch to add some privacy to last(1) while still
> giving non-privileged users access to their own login history.
> This is still a work in progress. I am reaching out to make sure my
> approach is proper and to get
On 6/5/2012 9:06 AM, Ed Schouten wrote:
> Hi Bryan,
>
> 2012/6/4 Bryan Drewery :
>> * Added utmp group
>
> Why call it utmp? FreeBSD 9+ does not do utmp. It does utmpx. Also,
> too many pieces of software already abuse the group `utmp'. Instead of
> doing utmp handling with it, it is used to cove
Hi Bryan,
2012/6/4 Bryan Drewery :
> * Added utmp group
Why call it utmp? FreeBSD 9+ does not do utmp. It does utmpx. Also,
too many pieces of software already abuse the group `utmp'. Instead of
doing utmp handling with it, it is used to cover all sorts of "this
uses TTYs" scenarios. It wouldn't
On 6/4/2012 8:17 AM, Bryan Drewery wrote:
>
>
> On 6/4/2012 4:42 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
>> A library is definiately a better place, although then I wouldn't pass
>> see_other_uids as an argument, but obtain it within the function itself.
>
> Does libc make sense for this? I'm thinking ye
Justifications:
Why the changes? This makes sense for shared hosting environments where
jails are not practical.
jails are NEVER practical, it is only a necessity! Necessity to be able to
run stupid software that cannot conform to basic unix standards and
require to be run as root or from ro
On 6/4/2012 4:42 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> A library is definiately a better place, although then I wouldn't pass
> see_other_uids as an argument, but obtain it within the function itself.
Does libc make sense for this? I'm thinking yes since it's where the utx
functions live.
In particu
On 6/4/2012 4:42 AM, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 08:42:04PM -0500, Bryan Drewery wrote:
>> Questions:
>>
>> To add this support to w(1) and who(1), I want to share the
>> is_user_restricted() function among all 3 binaries. I don't think this
>> really belongs in libc/libu
On Sun, Jun 03, 2012 at 08:42:04PM -0500, Bryan Drewery wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've written up a patch to add some privacy to last(1) while still
> giving non-privileged users access to their own login history.
>
> This is still a work in progress. I am reaching out to make sure my
> approach is proper
Hi,
I've written up a patch to add some privacy to last(1) while still
giving non-privileged users access to their own login history.
This is still a work in progress. I am reaching out to make sure my
approach is proper and to get some input on code sharing. My goal is to
add this support to w(1
14 matches
Mail list logo
