Dear sean, nate, Colin, Jamin,
thanks for your replies. Even not appreciated in a mailing list of
puritans, I reply to all emails by sending one only -- I assume the
Debian mailing list is not a list of mailing list-puritans since many
full-quoting-top-posters are seen ,-).
* sean finney <[EMAIL
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 11:57:22PM +0100, Lukas Ruf wrote:
> So, my question is quite easy: wouldn't it be more secure if mozilla
> was installed by dselect/apt-get/dpkg with set-uid to nobody.nogroup?
(snip)
> What do you think?
Since you asked, I think it would be a waste of time. Provided you
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 11:57:22PM +0100, Lukas Ruf wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> on the one hand one reads about bugs in the Mircosoft Internet
> Exploder based on Active Scripting and other holes quite often. On
> the other hand, rarely bugs in the Mozilla and Co. are reported.
> However, I believe th
Lukas Ruf said:
> What do you think?
wouldn't this introduce problems when it came to authenticating with
the X server? I mean, another user running mozilla probably cannot
just do it. You need to grant that user access to connect to your
display.
and if multiple users are using mozilla, that in
On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 11:57:22PM +0100, Lukas Ruf wrote:
> So, my question is quite easy: wouldn't it be more secure if mozilla
> was installed by dselect/apt-get/dpkg with set-uid to nobody.nogroup?
> /* Of course, this would make impossible to download files into one's
>home directory excep
Dear all,
on the one hand one reads about bugs in the Mircosoft Internet
Exploder based on Active Scripting and other holes quite often. On
the other hand, rarely bugs in the Mozilla and Co. are reported.
However, I believe that bugs are human -- without touching the
philosophical question whethe
6 matches
Mail list logo
