Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 00:51:06 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@linux.gr> To: Vlad GALU <vladgalu@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Default permissions of /home/user.. Message-ID: <20041023215106.GB4233@gothmog.gr> In-Reply-To: <79722fad04102314136d2dc0e2@mail.gmail.com> References: <1323.213.112.198.199.1098388008.squirrel@mail.hackunite.net> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1041023160159.59894D-100000@fledge.watson.org> <79722fad04102314136d2dc0e2@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2004-10-24 00:13, Vlad GALU <vladgalu@gmail.com> wrote: > One thing though. The mtree file that controls the permissions > for / specifies 0755 as the mask for /root. It's allright with me, I > have "chmod /root 0600" in my .profile, but still ... No problem :) mkdir /root/private chmod 0600 /root/private Seriously now, if you don't use the root account for doing "real work", it shouldn't be a problem that its HOME directory is world-readable. I only keep very few files in my /root tree. Most of them are dot-files for programs I might want to run as root (i.e. .bashrc, .vimrc and not much else). Sensitive data is never stored in /root and *REALLY* sensitive data (like passwords) are never stored in a computer at all. So, why would one need to be paranoid about the permissions or /root?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041023215106.GB4233>