On 2015-11-20 15:56 +0100, Decstasy wrote:
> Hello,
>
> since there is systemd some things have changed... Anyway I hope
> someone here can help me :)
>
> I want to change the default chmod of /dev/pts/* from 620 to 660.
Are you sure you want to this? Reasonable valu
Hello,
since there is systemd some things have changed... Anyway I hope someone
here can help me :)
I want to change the default chmod of /dev/pts/* from 620 to 660. In the
past it can be changed by /etc/defaults/devpts
But it does not work at all. I could not find any entry in /etc/fstab or
permission files. I think perhaps I wasn't clear
enough. For example I could run 'find' down the backup tree and print
the file modes of the files there.
cd /path/to/backup
find . -type l -prune -o -printf "chmod %m %p\n"
There are no whitespace in most files in /usr and
Cheers Bob :)
Uuummm - work files yes, system configs/settings not really.
Any top tips, like where are the permission file/s?
On 12 June 2015 at 22:07, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Julian Brooks wrote:
> > All seems well, valuable lesson(s) learnt.
> > Seriously thought it was terminal, appreciate th
Julian Brooks wrote:
> All seems well, valuable lesson(s) learnt.
> Seriously thought it was terminal, appreciate the wisdom people.
Glad to hear you solved your problem. In the future with a similar
problem you would be able to restore your current system permissions
from your backup. Not the e
Many thanks for the replies.
(I did say I'm sketchy here)
I was attempting to alter permissions on a folder.
I then read that all folders leding up to it must also have permission
altered.
So I then mistakenly actually ran
'sudo chmod -755 /usr/lib/TheFolderIMeantToAlter'
Helllo Julian,
Should just be to revert the change with 'chmod 755 /usr'.
On 10 June 2015 at 05:40, Julian Brooks wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Yes I'm an idiot...
>
> Not very experienced user here - 1st post:
>
> I mistakenly ran 'chmod -755 /usr'.
Julian Brooks writes:
>Hey all,
>Yes I'm an idiot...
>Not very experienced user here - 1st post:
>I mistakenly ran 'chmod -755 /usr'.
>How can I fix my permissions?
Run 'chmod 755 /usr'.
All your command did was remove permissions from the /usr direc
Hey all,
Yes I'm an idiot...
Not very experienced user here - 1st post:
I mistakenly ran 'chmod -755 /usr'.
How can I fix my permissions?
Haven't rebooted yet, too scared. Currently getting around as root.
Would prefer to avoid reinstall if possible.
Cheers,
Julian
x27;m trying to set 'sudo chmod 777 *', but I can't.
Gorka wrote:
> I have formated with FAT32 and then followed these instructions ...
> http://www.ubuntu.com/download/ubuntu/download
There's nothing in there, that I can see, that refers to upgrading the BIOS.
The f
On 05/10/2011 05:18 AM, Gorka wrote:
> Parent directory is /
>
>
>
> Aparently it changes permissions to 777, but suddenly they turn into
> 7001 again. There is some kind of persistency. Chown works well, but
> chmod works so.
>
<--deleted other suggestions for br
pendrive. In /ME folder I have
>> > got some files.bin to upgrade the BIOS an so.
>> > The problem is that I can't execute them. It says I have no
>> > permissions.These are 7001 (last number refers back to the sticky bit)
>> > I'm trying to set 'sudo
S an so.
> > The problem is that I can't execute them. It says I have no
> > permissions.These are 7001 (last number refers back to the sticky bit)
> > I'm trying to set 'sudo chmod 777 *', but I can't.
>
> What filesystem have you put on the pendrive?
x27;m trying to set 'sudo chmod 777 *', but I can't.
What filesystem have you put on the pendrive?
Chris
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/tmqn98xii6@news.roaima.co.uk
Parent directory is /
Aparently it changes permissions to 777, but suddenly they turn into 7001
again. There is some kind of persistency. Chown works well, but chmod works so.
De: Kousik Maiti [mailto:kousiks...@gmail.com]
Enviado el: martes, 10 de mayo de 2011 13:17
Para: Gorka
CC
Go to the parent directory. Run
sudo chmod -R 777 *
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Gorka wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I have got Ubuntu 11.04 installed on my pendrive. In /ME folder I have got
> some files.bin to upgrade the BIOS an so.
> The problem is that I can't execute the
Hi.
I have got Ubuntu 11.04 installed on my pendrive. In /ME folder I have got
some files.bin to upgrade the BIOS an so.
The problem is that I can't execute them. It says I have no
permissions.These are 7001 (last number refers back to the sticky bit)
I'm trying to set 'sudo chmo
On Fri, Apr 03, 2009 at 12:22:49AM +0800, Bret Busby wrote:
> bretnewworkstation:~# ls -l /data
> total 780
> -rw-r--r-- 1 bret bret 382652 2009-04-03 00:03 *.*
> -rw-r--r-- 1 bret bret 382652 2009-04-03 00:04 WonkyAcerWebPage_Iceape.jpg
That looks a bit suspicious.
--
Chris.
==
I contend th
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 09:42:38AM -0300, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
> Bret Busby wrote:
[snip]
>
> ... but looking at the contents of the directory. To check the
> permissions on /data itself, try
>
> ls -l -d /data
how easy it is to miss the simple things ...
>
[snip]
--
You can't che
unt, totally inaccessible to
>everyone, including the superuser.
Outside of enhanced access controls like SELinux and AppArmor, processes
with the euid of 0 ignore permission bits. Even if you chmod 000 a file on
purpose, a superuser can chmod it to whatever they like, read the entire
contents (
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Christofer C. Bell wrote:
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 6:55 AM, Bret Busby wrote:
I know that is how the syntax used to be, because I remember a person (on a
UNIX system) losing his account, when he accidentally entered
chmod .
, which changed his . file permissions to zero
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Eduardo M KALINOWSKI wrote:
If I use the format above, no error is returned; it just doesn't do
anything.
"
chmod 777 /data
You're changing the permissions of the directory...
bretnewworkstation:~# ls -l /data
total 16
drwx-- 2 root root 16384 2009-0
On Thu, 2 Apr 2009, Alex Samad wrote:
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 07:55:59PM +0800, Bret Busby wrote:
I have created a new data partition for a Ubuntu/Debian dual boot
system, using gparted from the Debian 4 installation.
[snip]
"
chmod 777 /data
I think when you use octects you ha
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 6:55 AM, Bret Busby wrote:
>
> I know that is how the syntax used to be, because I remember a person (on a
> UNIX system) losing his account, when he accidentally entered
> chmod .
> , which changed his . file permissions to zero, and not even the sysadmin
&
Bret Busby wrote:
> I have created a new data partition for a Ubuntu/Debian dual boot
> system, using gparted from the Debian 4 installation.
>
> Now I have to figure out how to make the new data partition accessible.
>
> chmod (from the Debian system) seems to be designed to
Bret Busby wrote:
>
> I have created a new data partition for a Ubuntu/Debian dual boot
> system, using gparted from the Debian 4 installation.
>
> Now I have to figure out how to make the new data partition accessible.
>
> chmod (from the Debian system) seems to be designed
On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 07:55:59PM +0800, Bret Busby wrote:
>
> I have created a new data partition for a Ubuntu/Debian dual boot
> system, using gparted from the Debian 4 installation.
>
[snip]
> "
> chmod 777 /data
I think when you use octects you have to prefix w
I have created a new data partition for a Ubuntu/Debian dual boot
system, using gparted from the Debian 4 installation.
Now I have to figure out how to make the new data partition accessible.
chmod (from the Debian system) seems to be designed to frustrate.
it used to be that using a syntax
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dexter Filmore wrote:
> Won't do me good, lots of subdirs where I need to copy selections. Will mount
> on another machine and copy over 100MBit, will have to do. Filed a bug
> report, we'll see.
In the meantime you could have a look at rsync. It ha
Am Mittwoch, 19. November 2008 20:02:33 schrieb Johannes Wiedersich:
> Dexter Filmore wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 19. November 2008 09:02:03 schrieb Raj Kiran Grandhi:
> >> Whatever is wrong with good old 'cp'? You can just add a redirect to
> >> /dev/null if the warnings bother you.
> >
> > What's wro
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dexter Filmore wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 19. November 2008 09:02:03 schrieb Raj Kiran Grandhi:
>> Whatever is wrong with good old 'cp'? You can just add a redirect to
>> /dev/null if the warnings bother you.
>
> What's wrong with the driver working as sup
Am Mittwoch, 19. November 2008 09:02:03 schrieb Raj Kiran Grandhi:
> Dexter Filmore wrote:
> > I use these options to mount an NTFS partition:
> >
> > users,gid=fuse,umask=0002,silent,utf8,locale=de_DE.utf8
> >
> > Now "silent" is supposed to suppress wa
Dexter Filmore wrote:
I use these options to mount an NTFS partition:
users,gid=fuse,umask=0002,silent,utf8,locale=de_DE.utf8
Now "silent" is supposed to suppress warnings on chmod/chown errors, each time
a copy operation is completed I get "couldn't change permissions on
I use these options to mount an NTFS partition:
users,gid=fuse,umask=0002,silent,utf8,locale=de_DE.utf8
Now "silent" is supposed to suppress warnings on chmod/chown errors, each time
a copy operation is completed I get "couldn't change permissions on XY"
I need to c
Shams Fantar wrote:
Hi all,
I'd like to know if it's very fine and "clean" to chmod -R 700 / ; Or
are there any better solutions ? My purpose beeing that local users
can't access/read any file which isn't in their own home directory.
Regards,
Isn't it enoug
Jochen Schulz wrote:
> The only idea that pops into my mind would be chroots for every user.
> But I don't see a point in doing that.
Maybe just one chroot with absolute minimal software available for all users
or perhaps use ${YOUR_FAVOURITE_VIRTUALIZATION_SOFTWARE_HERE}?
--
Juha Tuuna
--
T
On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 03:56:09PM +0200, Shams Fantar wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to know if it's very fine and "clean" to chmod -R 700 / ; Or
> are there any better solutions ? My purpose beeing that local users
> can't access/read any file which isn
John Hasler wrote:
> Shams Fantar writes:
>
>> My purpose beeing that local users can't access/read any file which isn't
>> in their own home directory.
>>
>
> Then they would not be able to run any programs. What are you trying to
> achieve? You can easily arrange for them not to be able
On 10/12/08 08:56, Shams Fantar wrote:
Hi all,
I'd like to know if it's very fine and "clean" to chmod -R 700 / ; Or
are there any better solutions ? My purpose beeing that local users
can't access/read any file which isn't in their own home directory.
As others
Shams Fantar writes:
> I'd like to know if it's very fine and "clean" to chmod -R 700 /
That would be a very, very, very bad idea. It would cripple your system
and you would probably end up reinstalling.
> My purpose beeing that local users can't access/read any
Jochen Schulz wrote:
> Shams Fantar:
>
>> I'd like to know if it's very fine and "clean" to chmod -R 700 / ;
>>
>
> This will prevent non-root users from reading *any* file on the system.
>
> If user 'shams' wants to list his home
Eugene V. Lyubimkin wrote:
> Shams Fantar wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'd like to know if it's very fine and "clean" to chmod -R 700 / ; Or
>> are there any better solutions ? My purpose beeing that local users
>> can't access/read a
Osamu Aoki wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 03:56:09PM +0200, Shams Fantar wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'd like to know if it's very fine and "clean" to chmod -R 700 / ; Or
>> are there any better solutions ? My purpose beeing that local users
On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 03:56:09PM +0200, Shams Fantar wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to know if it's very fine and "clean" to chmod -R 700 / ; Or
> are there any better solutions ? My purpose beeing that local users
> can't access/read any file which
Shams Fantar wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to know if it's very fine and "clean" to chmod -R 700 / ; Or
> are there any better solutions ? My purpose beeing that local users
> can't access/read any file which isn't in their own home directory.
No, th
Shams Fantar:
>
> I'd like to know if it's very fine and "clean" to chmod -R 700 / ;
This will prevent non-root users from reading *any* file on the system.
If user 'shams' wants to list his home directory /home/shams, he has to
have permissions to list / an
Hi all,
I'd like to know if it's very fine and "clean" to chmod -R 700 / ; Or
are there any better solutions ? My purpose beeing that local users
can't access/read any file which isn't in their own home directory.
Regards,
--
http://snurf.info
"Civil Engineer
Hi!
I'm running a local setup using Debian Etch 4.0, Apache 2.2, PHP 5.2.0
(suPHP+Suhosin) - all are the default Debian Packages, as my development
system. The problem I'm having is that all files created by PHP Skript are only
"chmoded" to 600, so only the user who created them has read access
On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 02:08:12PM +1100, Owen Townend wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 12:49 -0800, Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
.
> >
> > can you provide the exact output from ls -l? Usually, ???
> > indicates some kind of filesystem damage.
> >
.
> I'm running Ubuntu 7.10 and w
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 01:25:35PM -0300, Patricio Rojo wrote:
> - If you try 'ls', then its contents are shown
Yes, because you have read permission.
> - If you try 'cd' to it, you get permission denied.
Yes, because you do not have search ("x") permission.
> - If you try 'ls -l', you get
Raj Kiran Grandhi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Is there some reason why you would "chmod 670" and not "chmod 770"?
To cause filesystem breakage? :-) It's not a bright thing to do.
Users do a lot of not bright things. We should know what's going to
h
Owen Townend <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 13:25 -0300, Patricio Rojo wrote:
> >
> > I recently noticed that strange things happen if you do 'chmod 670' on
> > a directory that you own, and whose group is set to one you belong.
> &
bug or it is expected behavior. If
> > > this is a bug I would appreciate someone telling me who to report it
> > > to:D...
> > >
> > >
> > > I recently noticed that strange things happen if you do 'chmod 670' on
> > > a directory
Patricio Rojo wrote:
Hi,
I don't know whether this is a bug or it is expected behavior. If
this is a bug I would appreciate someone telling me who to report it
to:D...
I recently noticed that strange things happen if you do 'chmod 670' on
a directory that you own, and who
elling me who to report it
> > to:D...
> >
> >
> > I recently noticed that strange things happen if you do 'chmod 670' on
> > a directory that you own, and whose group is set to one you belong.
> >
> > - If you try 'ls', then its contents
On Tue, 2007-11-13 at 13:25 -0300, Patricio Rojo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I don't know whether this is a bug or it is expected behavior. If
> this is a bug I would appreciate someone telling me who to report it
> to:D...
>
>
> I recently noticed that strange things ha
Hi,
I don't know whether this is a bug or it is expected behavior. If
this is a bug I would appreciate someone telling me who to report it
to:D...
I recently noticed that strange things happen if you do 'chmod 670' on
a directory that you own, and whose group is set to
Thanks Wei Chen!!
Jordi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 19 Mar 2007 04:18:27 -0700, Jordi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just one last question Wei Chen:
And the files inside that folders are ok chmoded that way?
Thanks for your recommendation.
Yes. All files can be set 644 and all directories can be set 755
except that the upload directory should
Just one last question Wei Chen:
And the files inside that folders are ok chmoded that way?
Jordi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thank Wei Chen,
you solved all my doubts.
I am using Drupal as CMS, it is great. I recommend you to use it.
So long, and thanks very much
Jordi R Cardona
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 18 Mar 2007 13:24:54 -0700, Jordi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Wei Chen,
Thanks for that excelent info.
> I think 755 is all right. The execute bit for a directory means the
> permission of going into the directory.
And what about setting the files to chmod 744 ? That way wi
Hi Wei Chen,
Thanks for that excelent info.
> I think 755 is all right. The execute bit for a directory means the
> permission of going into the directory.
And what about setting the files to chmod 744 ? That way will be
better? Or not?
Jordi
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PRO
On 18 Mar 2007 09:16:35 -0700, Jordi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello
I have a web server in my PC. I need to chmod the files correctly so I
don't have a security risk.
I am using a CMS for the website.
I have full access to my pc, as it is in my house, and I can
manipulate
Hello
I have a web server in my PC. I need to chmod the files correctly so I
don't have a security risk.
I am using a CMS for the website.
I have full access to my pc, as it is in my house, and I can
manipulate it through keyboard, so I have no problem to change the
chmod to the most restri
On Sat, Oct 21, 2006 at 12:22:47AM -0400, Kevin Mark wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 11:51:03PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
>
> > Hmm. I am part of the cyrus-sasl maintenance team and we are
> > desperately trying to get away from the current packages since they have
> > essentially been un
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 11:51:03PM -0400, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> Hmm. I am part of the cyrus-sasl maintenance team and we are
> desperately trying to get away from the current packages since they have
> essentially been unmaintained for over two years. We just uploaded the
But would I be c
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 11:38:12PM -0400, Kevin Mark wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 08:25:03PM +0200, Eugenio Jordán González wrote:
> > Hi:
> >
> > I know it's already pretty late to try to provide some hints on this issue,
> > but
> > didn't like to miss the chance in case some other people m
On Fri, Oct 20, 2006 at 08:25:03PM +0200, Eugenio Jordán González wrote:
> Hi:
>
> I know it's already pretty late to try to provide some hints on this issue,
> but
> didn't like to miss the chance in case some other people might hit same issue
> in the future.
>
> Provided plugin for Squirrelma
Hi:
I know it's already pretty late to try to provide some hints on this
issue, but didn't like to miss the chance in case some other people
might hit same issue in the future.
Provided plugin for Squirrelmail + Cyrus + SASL uses, as per code, a call to saslpasswd2 binary. In fact, it's writi
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006 12:17:40 -0600
Mike McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> igor wrote:
> > On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 05:35 -0500, Bill Marcum wrote:
> >
> >>>and i can't (?!) chmod it to 755 as user f13o?
> >>>
> >>>This hasn
igor wrote:
On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 05:35 -0500, Bill Marcum wrote:
and i can't (?!) chmod it to 755 as user f13o?
This hasn't happened to me... please, help.
What are the permissions of the directory?
I solved it. Was my mistake. File was downloaded in a hurry to a usb
stick
On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 05:35 -0500, Bill Marcum wrote:
> > and i can't (?!) chmod it to 755 as user f13o?
> >
> > This hasn't happened to me... please, help.
> >
> What are the permissions of the directory?
I solved it. Was my mistake. File was downloade
On Tue, Jan 24, 2006 at 06:01:33PM +0100, Igor Milovanovic wrote:
> I have this file:
>
> -rwx-- 1 f13o f13o 7.1K 2003-06-12 14:08 ppmtolss16
>
> and i can't (?!) chmod it to 755 as user f13o?
>
> This hasn't happened to me... please, help.
>
What ar
On Tue, 2006-01-24 at 18:01 +0100, Igor Milovanovic wrote:
> -rwx-- 1 f13o f13o 7.1K 2003-06-12 14:08 ppmtolss16
> and i can't (?!) chmod it to 755 as user f13o?
> This hasn't happened to me... please, help.
What is the full path ?
What are the permissions in the
Mike McCarty wrote:
Igor Milovanovic wrote:
First, I suggest you put a reasonable subject on your messages.
I have this file:
-rwx-- 1 f13o f13o 7.1K 2003-06-12 14:08 ppmtolss16
and i can't (?!) chmod it to 755 as user f13o?
This hasn't happened to me... please, help.
Igor Milovanovic wrote:
First, I suggest you put a reasonable subject on your messages.
I have this file:
-rwx-- 1 f13o f13o 7.1K 2003-06-12 14:08 ppmtolss16
and i can't (?!) chmod it to 755 as user f13o?
This hasn't happened to me... please, help.
Are you getting an err
Igor Milovanovic wrote:
I have this file:
-rwx-- 1 f13o f13o 7.1K 2003-06-12 14:08 ppmtolss16
and i can't (?!) chmod it to 755 as user f13o?
This hasn't happened to me... please, help.
It might be that the "immutable" attribute is set for this file. You can
check t
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005 12:49:39 +0100
David Dorward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Something along the lines of:
>
> chmod -R 700 ~/
> find ~/ -type f -exec chmod 600 {} \;
>
> might do what you want.
Would it be better to do this?
find ~/ -P -type d -exec chmod 700 {} \;
On (02/11/05 12:49), David Dorward wrote:
> > 2. "find" in my home directory gives 1,300 files. Is there any utility that
> > can be used to adjust their permissions quickly? (I will mostly be
> > recursively setting permissions on directories.)
>
> Something alo
ething along the lines of:
chmod -R 700 ~/
find ~/ -type f -exec chmod 600 {} \;
might do what you want.
(Change all files and directories to be readable, writable and
executable by owner, then change all files so they are not executable.
You may wish to let other people read some files)
Masatran (Rajasekaran Deepak) wrote:
I accidently executed "chmod -R a+rX ." on my home directory. I want to undo
its effect.
1. Is there any way to undo its effect? (I do not have any recent backup,
and the administrators do not maintain a backup.)
2. "find" in my home d
I accidently executed "chmod -R a+rX ." on my home directory. I want to undo
its effect.
1. Is there any way to undo its effect? (I do not have any recent backup,
and the administrators do not maintain a backup.)
2. "find" in my home directory gives 1,300 files. Is there any
On Tue, Jun 22 at 08:41AM +0800, John Summerfield wrote:
> Will Trillich wrote:
> >TASK: allow USER1 to run a program AS USER2.
> >SOLUTION: setuid bit (in theory, right?)
> >PROBLEM: theory not matching execution...
> >
> >we've got a little C program that must be RUN AS a certain user
> >(cy
On Tue, Jun 22 at 12:55PM +0800, John Summerfield wrote:
> Will Trillich wrote:
> >On Tue, Jun 22 at 08:41AM +0800, John Summerfield wrote:
> >>Why would you not use sudo?
> >
> >you mean, have apache use sudo to change a user's email (sasl)
> >password? the purpose of this gizmo is to have the web
Will Trillich wrote:
On Tue, Jun 22 at 08:41AM +0800, John Summerfield wrote:
Will Trillich wrote:
TASK: allow USER1 to run a program AS USER2.
SOLUTION: setuid bit (in theory, right?)
PROBLEM: theory not matching execution...
we've got a little C program that must be RUN AS a certain
On Mon, Jun 21 at 06:01PM -0700, Sean O'Dell wrote:
> On Monday 21 June 2004 09:23, Will Trillich wrote:
> > TASK: allow USER1 to run a program AS USER2.
> > SOLUTION: setuid bit (in theory, right?)
> > PROBLEM: theory not matching execution...
>
> Sounds obvious, but make sure user www-data
On Tue, Jun 22 at 08:41AM +0800, John Summerfield wrote:
> Will Trillich wrote:
>
> >TASK: allow USER1 to run a program AS USER2.
> >SOLUTION: setuid bit (in theory, right?)
> >PROBLEM: theory not matching execution...
> >
> >we've got a little C program that must be RUN AS a certain user
> >
On Monday 21 June 2004 09:23, Will Trillich wrote:
> TASK: allow USER1 to run a program AS USER2.
> SOLUTION: setuid bit (in theory, right?)
> PROBLEM: theory not matching execution...
Sounds obvious, but make sure user www-data is in the list of users in
the /etc/group file for group www-da
Will Trillich wrote:
TASK: allow USER1 to run a program AS USER2.
SOLUTION: setuid bit (in theory, right?)
PROBLEM: theory not matching execution...
we've got a little C program that must be RUN AS a certain user
(cyrus) BY another user (www-data) so we figured turning on the
SETUID bit would
# cd /usr/share/squirrelmail/plugins/chg_sasl_passwd
# gcc -o chgsaslpasswd chgsaslpasswd.c
# chown cyrus.www-data chgsaslpasswd
# chmod 4550 chgsaslpasswd
now, to double-check:
# ls -F chgsaslpasswd
-r-sr-x--- 1 cyrus www-data 12346 Jun 17 18:51 chgsaslpasswd*
so, any us
On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 10:31:21AM -0700, Bill Moseley wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 09:36:52AM -0600, s. keeling wrote:
> > Usenix' ;login: had an article recently discussing this sort of
> > vulnerability. If you're letting just anyone at your C compiler, you
> > MAY be facilitating exploits.
On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 10:23:14PM +0100, Stephen Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > But, after some clearing up. My folders where a mess. So i moved the php
> > > > > folder, to a new slot. Made sure that all the permissions where still
> > > > > 775. But now apache is telling me, that i
t;
> > > > Thanks for all the help so far.
> > > >
> > > > Ok, i have changed all my php files. To 775. Using chmod. So no problem
> > > > there. Some of my php files worked. When i pointed my browser at them.
> > > > So cool.
> > > &g
gt; Ok, i have changed all my php files. To 775. Using chmod. So no problem
> > > there. Some of my php files worked. When i pointed my browser at them.
> > > So cool.
> > >
> > > But, after some clearing up. My folders where a mess. So i moved the php
>
On Mon, Dec 15, 2003 at 11:00:27PM +0100, Stephen Turner said
> Hi guys,
>
> Thanks for all the help so far.
>
> Ok, i have changed all my php files. To 775. Using chmod. So no problem
> there. Some of my php files worked. When i pointed my browser at them.
> So cool.
Hi guys,
Thanks for all the help so far.
Ok, i have changed all my php files. To 775. Using chmod. So no problem
there. Some of my php files worked. When i pointed my browser at them.
So cool.
But, after some clearing up. My folders where a mess. So i moved the php
folder, to a new slot. Made
On Sunday 14 December 2003 13:15, Stephen Turner wrote:
> I am a newbie. Everyone has to start somewhere right?
>
> :)
>
> Anyway, i have been using chmod. I wanted to change all my files to 775
> in one folder. I used the -R addition. But it did not work.
>
> It gives
Hi!
On Sun Dec 14, 2003 at 01:15:01PM +0100, Stephen Turner wrote:
> Anyway, i have been using chmod. I wanted to change all my files to
> 775 in one folder. I used the -R addition. But it did not work.
>
> It gives me the message 'too few arguments'.
So you gav
>
> Anyway, i have been using chmod. I wanted to change all my files to 775
> in one folder. I used the -R addition. But it did not work.
>
> It gives me the message 'too few arguments'.
>
> What is going on?
>
> I did in the end, change them all one by one. Wh
1 - 100 of 221 matches
Mail list logo
