Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2003 01:50:26 +0400 (MSD) From: "."@babolo.ru To: Lev Walkin <vlm@netli.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ipcad 2.8.1 bug: doesn't run with uid 0 which is needed for rsh Message-ID: <1049406626.887767.927.nullmailer@cicuta.babolo.ru> In-Reply-To: <3E8CA472.8070807@netli.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> .@babolo.ru wrote: > >> > >>=== quote === > >>Set this uid to be safe in the long run. Please change it if you're > >>aware of the consequences. RSH service will NOT work if process is > >>not privileged. > >>=== quote === > >> > >>There are no words about configuring uid 0. > >> > >>Moreover, the sample configuration has uid and gid lines COMMENTED OUT. > > > > > > I do not understand, why uid is artificially > > restricted at 65535? Why not full 32 bit uid? > > To encourage users think twice about using large ids for daemons. Why? Is warning better then refuse? And option suppress warning. Or let it for responsibility at all?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1049406626.887767.927.nullmailer>