On Jun 25, Peter Tobias wrote
> If every package has to use it why not add this function to dpkg?
> dpkg already keeps a file with the contents of each packet. This
> could be extended to keep the permissions too. Or create a database
> with contains every filename (just like "locate") and the perm
On Jun 25, Michael Meskes wrote:
> I still have problems with that. What you describe is the eventual
> scenario, correct? But right now it lacks functionality, because not
> every packages uses it. So maybe we should add a new rule in our
> policy.
If every package has to use it why not add this
ndreas Jellinghaus [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 1997 6:24 PM
>To:Michael Meskes
>Subject: Re: Use of suidmanager
>
>On Jun 24, Michael Meskes wrote
>> But only the ones that are really installed suid. If I make a program
>> suid that's not in s
On Jun 24, Michael Meskes wrote
> It seems I misunderstood what suidmanager does.
>
> But I still don't see the reason for non-setuid programs listed there
> by default. Does that mean 'You can make this program suid, but we
> prefer it to be not-suid.'?
a) show the option : maybe you want to ma
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Michael Meskes wrote:
> But I still don't see the reason for non-setuid programs listed there
> by default. Does that mean 'You can make this program suid, but we
> prefer it to be not-suid.'?
More of the line that the program may be usefu
en
>Go SF49ers! Go Rhein Fire! | Tel: (+49) 2405/4670-44
>Use Debian GNU/Linux! | Fax: (+49) 2405/4670-10
>
>>-Original Message-
>>From: Christoph Lameter [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 1997 4:51 PM
>>To: Michael
>From: Christoph Lameter [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 1997 4:51 PM
>To:Michael Meskes
>Cc:Die Adresse des Empfängers ist unbekannt.
>Subject: RE: Use of suidmanager
>
>On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Michael Meskes wrote:
>
>>But that m
On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Michael Meskes wrote:
>But that means we have to add all permission since all are configurable.
>Isn't it a better idea to save the standard setting only for those
>programs that are setuid by default?
I am not sure that I understand this.
/etc/suid.conf contains permission
CTED]
>Sent: Monday, June 23, 1997 5:45 PM
>To:debian-devel@lists.debian.org
>Cc:Die Adresse des Empfängers ist unbekannt.
>Subject: Re: Use of suidmanager
>
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
>: Could anyone please tell me the advantages of suidmanage
es
>Cc:debian-devel@lists.debian.org
>Subject: Re: Use of suidmanager
>
>On Jun 23, Michael Meskes wrote
>> Could anyone please tell me the advantages of suidmanager as it is right
>> now?
>
>it's useless, because not all packages use it.
>
>> I
On Jun 23, Michael Meskes wrote
> Could anyone please tell me the advantages of suidmanager as it is right
> now?
it's useless, because not all packages use it.
> I can see the usefullness of a tool like that, but I wonder if there
> should be a daily test run to make sure no other file are sui
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
: Could anyone please tell me the advantages of suidmanager as it is right
: now? I can see the usefullness of a tool like that, but I wonder if there
: should be a daily test run to make sure no other file are suid. Or is this
: dones elsewhere?
Not all p
12 matches
Mail list logo
