Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 17:13:36 +1100 (EST) From: Sean Winn <sean@gothic.net.au> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> Cc: security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why not sandbox BIND? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9911121711050.82150-100000@vampire.gothic.net.au> In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.19991111220759.044f46d0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 11 Nov 1999, Brett Glass wrote: > I assume you mean rc.conf, not named.conf. > > In any case, maybe there should be a "sandbox BIND" flag in rc.conf > that selects a sandboxed configuration and is on by default. > Also, it'd be nice to have the user "named" already in /etc/passwd > and ready to go. As in the existing... bind:*:53:53:Bind Sandbox:/:/sbin/nologin In /etc/defaults/rc.conf there's an example named_flags line... #named_flags="-u bind -g bind" # Flags for named -- Sean Winn email: sean@gothic.net.au All opinions valued at $0.02, and not subject to inflation. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9911121711050.82150-100000>