From owner-freebsd-security Fri Nov 12 16:19:54 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 758) id 3B35814DBB; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 16:19:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26CA01CD438; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 16:19:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kris@hub.freebsd.org) Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 16:19:49 -0800 (PST) From: Kris Kennaway To: Barry Irwin Cc: Josef Karthauser , Brett Glass , Bill Fumerola , Cy Schubert - ITSD Open Systems Group , security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why not sandbox BIND? In-Reply-To: <19991112212912.Z57266@rucus.ru.ac.za> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 12 Nov 1999, Barry Irwin wrote: > 3.2 System CVSup'd doesnt have it by default > su-2.03# cat /etc/passwd | grep named That's because, as several people have explained, the user is 'bind', not 'named'. The bind user and group was added by Matt Dillon on Dec 1, 1998, according to http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/etc/master.passwd, and is present in 3.1-R, 3.2-R and 3.3-R The reason why sandboxing is not enabled by default has been explained elsewhere in this thread. Kris ---- Cthulhu for President! For when you're tired of choosing the _lesser_ of two evils.. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message