From owner-freebsd-ports Thu Oct 18 6:49:43 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from axl.seasidesoftware.co.za (axl.seasidesoftware.co.za [196.31.7.201]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B286237B405; Thu, 18 Oct 2001 06:49:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sheldonh (helo=axl.seasidesoftware.co.za) by axl.seasidesoftware.co.za with local-esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 15uDYc-0007oM-00; Thu, 18 Oct 2001 15:49:58 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav Cc: "Andrey A. Chernov" , ports@freebsd.org, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: HEADS UP: Apache port change from nobody:nogroup to www:www planned In-reply-to: Your message of "18 Oct 2001 15:25:55 +0200." Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 15:49:58 +0200 Message-ID: <30029.1003412998@axl.seasidesoftware.co.za> Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On 18 Oct 2001 15:25:55 +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote: > It should set up and use its own UID, just like QMail and Postfix set > up and use their own UIDs. Ideally, there would be a user in our > standard master.passwd named "smtp" or "mail", with UID 25 (and of > course a corresponding group). You don't think there's merit in the availability of a UID who is guaranteed to own no files and has world-only access to the filesystem (or a chrooted subtree)? I would think the sheer number of applications "abusing" nobody for this purpose would suggest that it's desirable. Hell, I'd almost go so far as to say we should rename the NIS/NFS UID 65534, and create a new UID called nobody. Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message