Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 00:45:12 -0700 From: "Crist J. Clark" <crist.clark@attbi.com> To: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Restricting umasks in periodic scripts Message-ID: <20020519004512.C67779@blossom.cjclark.org> In-Reply-To: <200205171420.g4HEKSWs093218@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org>; from brian@Awfulhak.org on Fri, May 17, 2002 at 03:20:28PM %2B0100 References: <200205171420.g4HEKSWs093218@hak.lan.Awfulhak.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, May 17, 2002 at 03:20:28PM +0100, Brian Somers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to poll arch for opinions on the attached patch. Whilst
> I believe I've plugged all of the existing umask-type problems in
> -current (soon to be MFC'd re@ willing), it's usually better to be
> safe.
Personally, I don't like. I'd rather not have to use root to review
{mount,dmesg}.{to,yester}day for example, and there is no reason to
try to hide the information they contain.
But I understand why some files should default to no world or group
read permissions. Maybe customizing this is something we can work into
the NetBSD-style startup? :)
As for -STABLE, I haven't really heard any complaints? Might be a bit
late to change the status quo before 4.6-RELEASE.
--
Crist J. Clark | cjclark@alum.mit.edu
| cjclark@jhu.edu
http://people.freebsd.org/~cjc/ | cjc@freebsd.org
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020519004512.C67779>