On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 01:09:20AM +0200, Martin Bammer wrote:
> Does Windows save usernames for access rights?
No, NTFS permissions are tied to SIDs which are like UNIX UIDs/GIDs but
unique for non-default entities, because they include the computer SID
(those may be non-unique if a system was clo
> [...]
In the original scenario, the concern was was with shared media having
uid/gid numbers that don't match what's on the system. In that
scenario, this was viewed as a security concern. This is not a
security concern because once someone has physical access to your
unencrypted data, it's no l
On 2016-08-15 01:09:20 +0200 (+0200), Martin Bammer wrote:
[...]
> I thought that the IDs for system services are fixed. Static ID
> mapping is a nice idea which would be helpful for system services.
[...]
Some of them are fixed: https://wiki.debian.org/SystemGroups
There are compiled-in defaults
Adam Borowski writes ("Re: UID and GID generation"):
> Actually, I do like this idea; obviously with reasoning contrary to the
> original report. In any small organization or a family, where you have an
> ad hoc set of machines without centralized user management, it is nice t
>
> For all such situations a workaround exists. Still I've been wondering
> for years why appearently nobody else considers this a problem. So I
> patched adduser to determine the user (also: group) ID from a static
> "acount name"<->"ID" mapping. It's in the BTS somewhere eight years
> ago, and
Christoph Biedl wrote...
> So I patched adduser to determine the user (also: group) ID from a
> static "acount name"<->"ID" mapping. It's in the BTS somewhere eight
> years ago,
FTR: #243929
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Martin Bammer wrote...
> I've got an issue with the generation of UIDs and GIDs when new
> users are added. By default UIDs and GIDs for users and user groups
> are values starting from 1000 (on Red Hat from 500). When a user is
> added the next free value is chosen.
Yes, also NFS has a problem h
> Actually, I do like this idea; obviously with reasoning contrary to the
> original report. In any small organization or a family, where you have an
> ad hoc set of machines without centralized user management, it is nice to
> have consistent uids.
>
> This helps with cases like moving a disk ar
> Actually, I do like this idea; obviously with reasoning contrary to the
> original report. In any small organization or a family, where you have an
> ad hoc set of machines without centralized user management, it is nice to
> have consistent uids.
>
> This helps with cases like moving a disk ar
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 07:37:43PM +0200, Philipp Kern wrote:
> On 2016-08-12 16:29, Martin Bammer wrote:
> >The issue now is when the same user names are added on different
> >machine in a different order. A very common example is a family where
> >each family member has it's own computer. So for
On 2016-08-12 16:29, Martin Bammer wrote:
The issue now is when the same user names are added on different
machine in a different order. A very common example is a family where
each family member has it's own computer. So for example on computer A
the users are added in the order john, mary, dave
This is a nice idea. I think that it is somewhat important that, this design
issue is fixed
-- Original message--
From: Martin Bammer
Date: Fri, Aug 12, 2016 17:30
To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org;
Subject:UID and GID generation
Hi,
I've got an issue with the generation of UIDs
12 matches
Mail list logo
