Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1996 09:41:34 -0600 (CST) From: mikebo@tellabs.com To: hackers@freebsd.org Cc: mikebo (Mike Borowiec) Subject: Digests are truncated? Message-ID: <199611251541.JAA08367@sunc210.tellabs.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Who is the maintainer of the mailing list software? I subscribe to the hackers and questions digests. I noticed that this morning the majority of digests contain only a fraction of the articles in the table of contents. Is the mailer software broken, or is something wrong with my corporate mail exchanger? Below is only one example of the truncation I'm seeing... Regards, - Mike Forwarded message: > From freefall.freebsd.org!owner-hackers-digest Sat Nov 23 23:02:06 1996 > From: owner-hackers-digest@freefall.freebsd.org > Date: Sat, 23 Nov 1996 20:53:33 -0800 (PST) > Message-Id: <199611240453.UAA27942@freefall.freebsd.org> > To: freebsd-hackers-digest@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: hackers-digest V1 #1674 > Reply-To: hackers@freefall.freebsd.org > Errors-To: owner-hackers-digest@freefall.freebsd.org > Precedence: bulk > > > hackers-digest Saturday, 23 November 1996 Volume 01 : Number 1674 > > In this issue: > Re: non-root users binding to ports < 1024 (was: Re: BoS: Exploit for sendmail smtpd bug (ver. 8.7-8.8.2).) > RE: Install question > kernel not making > rarpd > Re: rarpd > dgb driver with interrupts > Re: Has anybody addressed this "ping" problem? Is it even an issue with FreeBSD? > Re: descriptors and sockets and pipes, oh my > Re: non-root users binding to ports < 1024 > Re: rarpd > Re: rarpd > Re: non-root users binding to ports < 1024 (was: Re: BoS: Exploit for sendmail smtpd bug (ver. 8.7-8.8.2).) > Re: rarpd > Re: non-root users binding to ports < 1024 > RE: RealAudio for FreeBSD! > Holy Moley Batman... I love ccd. and BTW, if you need 4gb disks. > Re: Pentium Pro status > Re: Pentium Pro status > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > From: Warner Losh <imp@village.org> > Date: Sat, 23 Nov 1996 15:50:12 -0700 > Subject: Re: non-root users binding to ports < 1024 (was: Re: BoS: Exploit for sendmail smtpd bug (ver. 8.7-8.8.2).) > > In message <Pine.BSF.3.95.961123150746.5433B-100000@alive.ampr.ab.ca> > Marc Slemko writes: > : I want to try to keep the very political and religious issue of running > : sendmail as a non-root user out of the discussion of non-root users > : binding to ports <1024 as much as possible because the sendmail issue > : isn't something that can be solved easily. > : > : I see little room for bugs in the kernel implementation of non-root users > : binding to ports <1024; there is lots of room for problems in the use of > : such a feature by programs, but that is really a different issue; > : probably more important, but different and far more involved. > > True. I a trivial way to do this would be for programs that wish to > bind to a port < 1024 would be as follows. Consider inetd. Now, > let's say there is another such program that creates a listening > socket, forks, setuid to something, execs a server program (say > sendmail). This server program can then have access to that port w/o > running as root. No need for the kernel to get involved at all. When > the server wishes to close the port, he does so. Then, when the > server wants to reopen it, that server would just exit. The > controlling program would then refork, etc and then the server would > be back in business. While all servers that wish to bind to ports < > 1024 and not run as root would have to be configured in a central > file, this accomplishes most things that the kernel interface talked > about would do. Heck, you could even merge this functionality into > inetd, or have a new program, inetd2 for lack of a better name, do it. > > Maybe I've missed something here... I don't see a compelling need for > this facility in the kernel, at least for the most common cases that > I've seen examples for. I can imagine complex programs desiring some > way to bind mutliple ports, or not have to exit to get back into the > swing of things. > > I'll leave the design issues of sendmail alone as well :-).... > > Warner > > ------------------------------ > > From: Edwin Burley <khan@vnet.net> > Date: Sat, 23 Nov 1996 17:42:30 -0500 (EST) > Subject: RE: Install question > > On 23-Nov-96 Joe McGuckin wrote: > >> > >I have a second IDE drive that I want to be FreeBSD. The first disk is > >Windoze. > > > >Right now I have the second drive hooked up as the primary (just to > >make sure there aren't any accidents that would wipe out the first drive). > >After FreeBSD is installed, I plan on making the freebsd drive the secondary > >IDE drive. > > go ahead and setup the system the way you want it. And then run the setup disk, > but remember that at anytime that something can go wrong, so it is a good idea > to have back up of everything...if you are getting 2.2, it may be better to down > lownd > it all to the system before starting..I could not get the modem working in setup > -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael Borowiec - mikebo@tellabs.com - Tellabs Operations, Inc. Senior Member of Technical Staff 4951 Indiana Avenue, MS 63 630-512-8211 FAX: 630-512-7099 Lisle, IL 60532 USA --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199611251541.JAA08367>