Date: Sun, 5 May 1996 14:03:02 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <rgrimes@GndRsh.aac.dev.com> To: nlawson@kdat.csc.calpoly.edu (Nathan Lawson) Cc: nash@mcs.com, security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: dot.cshrc and weird umask value Message-ID: <199605052103.OAA02210@GndRsh.aac.dev.com> In-Reply-To: <199605051602.JAA20318@kdat.calpoly.edu> from Nathan Lawson at "May 5, 96 09:02:39 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > Can anyone tell me why on FreeBSD (the same with BSD/OS) there is the umask > > > value 2 ???? This simply couses producing group writable files. Imagine the > > > person which created .forward file, anyone in his group can modify this to > > > reforward files or duplicate mails. > > > > > > This is in /usr/share/skel/dot.cshrc. I know that everyone can set proper > > > value of umask but some not experienced users do not know about it. And even > > > experienced administrators belive that the distribution skeleton files are > > > good enough to copy then into user directory. Is there a reason for this ???? > > > > UNIQ GROUP > > > > This model of uid/gid administration allows far greater flexibility that > > lumping users into groups and having to muck with the umask when working > > in a shared area. > > > > I have been using this model for almost 10 years and found that it works > > for most situations, and has never gotten in the way. (Rod Grimes) > > Unfortunately, this solution does not scale well to an enterprise-wide > network as your groups file grows ever larger. Remember it's not hashed like > the pwd.db, and that's reason enough for me to have modified adduser to not > support that scheme. If your using this interprise wide you should be using NIS, if your using NIS your group file is hashed by NIS. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@gndrsh.aac.dev.com Accurate Automation Company Reliable computers for FreeBSD
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199605052103.OAA02210>