[security-discuss] Symantec Mail Security Issue on Solaris 8

2006-11-03 Thread Alfredo De Luca
Hi all, IHAC facing some issues about Symantec Mail Security for SMTP (4.0.0.59) on a machine with Solaris 8. Occasionally the process (smssmtp) don't seems to be working properly meaning it goes slow and the only action to fix it is stopping and restarting the process. Does anoybody have issu

[security-discuss] Using passwd(1) for a NIS+ role

2006-11-03 Thread Daryl McKinnon
I am having trouble changing the password for a userid that has been set up as an RBAC role in Solaris 8. As a preamble, I want to prevent someone from logging into a userid, enforcing su instead, and it seems an RBAC role might be the way to go: I don't need any other features of RBAC at this

[security-discuss] Overview (rollup) of recent activity on security-discuss

2006-11-03 Thread Eric Boutilier
For background on what this is, see: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/message.jspa?messageID=24416#24416 http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/message.jspa?messageID=25200#25200 == security-discuss 10/16 - 10/31 == Size of all threads du

[security-discuss] sync as non privileged user (Was Re: [request-sponsor] 4967733 and 6400646)

2006-11-03 Thread casper....@sun.com
>> Assuming we do steps 1 and 2 above, do we get into any problems with >> POSIX compliance if the default basic privilege set does not include >> PRIV_SYS_SYNC? There is no such thing as a "default basic set". There's a "basic set" and there's the "default set" users get when they login; they

[security-discuss] sync as non privileged user (Was Re: [request-sponsor] 4967733 and 6400646)

2006-11-03 Thread Darren J Moffat
Mike Gerdts wrote: > On 10/30/06, Darren J Moffat wrote: >> James Carlson wrote: >> Why, other than the returning an error we already have 5 such privileges >> in the basic set. Now in each of those cases (proc_info, proc_session, >> proc_fork, proc_exec, file_link_any) there is a way to return a