Date: Fri, 03 Sep 1999 17:18:14 +0200 From: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@uunet.co.za> To: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Proposal: Add generic username for 3rd-party MTA's Message-ID: <976.936371894@axl.noc.iafrica.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 03 Sep 1999 16:12:13 %2B0100." <E11Mv0f-0003BY-00@fanf.noc.demon.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 03 Sep 1999 16:12:13 +0100, Tony Finch wrote: > mail:x:6:6:Unprivileged mail user:/: > smtp:x:0:0:Mail Daemon User:/: > > (Presumably the smtp user is privileged in order to bind to port 25.) > I prefer user & group mail since it is non-cryptic and common. Well, this isn't what we'd want if we sandboxed Sendmail (using the RunAsUser option). We'd want the sendmail binary setuid root, but it'd drop its priviledges as soon as it had bound to the port, operating thereafter as whatever sandbox user we choose. However, it does seem that a number of people will object to sandboxing sendmail, since we'll be introducing a new UID into the base system which, I'm told, causes lots of problems. Perhaps the objections were raised because I didn't say I wanted to sandbox Sendmail. I've looked through my sent mail and I can see that I didn't say anything about it in my initial mail. That's unfortunate. Ciao, Sheldon. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?976.936371894>