Unfortunately, as I expounded to Malcolm Lay, in this application (a shared-hosting webserver) suexec is being used which does not traverse symbolic links. :-( MAC_BSDEXTENDED in Bsd6.2 solves the problem very nicely. Cheers, Brett.
________________________________ From: George Vanev [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 9 January 2007 7:42 p.m. To: Brett Davidson Subject: Re: Permissions advice needed. Brett, Why don't you make a symbolic link to that file. You may set read, write and execute permissions if you wish... doesn't matter. The users will be able to run your executable via the link, but they won't be able to modify it. On 1/8/07, Brett Davidson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have a curious problem. I need an executable file to be owned by a user's uid and gid so they can run it. HOWEVER, I don't want them to be able to modify or delete the file and/or it's permissions. Another program will do that. This, under standard Unix permissions, is a tad difficult. :-) ACL's don't help here as the owner of a file has the ability to change permissions. I could set the immutable bit (Linux term for the schg flag) but the modifying program does not recognise this flag and will thus fail to modify the file. (I have no control over the modifying program). Any ideas? I don't want to go down the line of using BSD MAC but I'm starting to think I may have too just to be able to prevent the user from modifying ONE file! (I'm not even sure I could implement this using MAC anyway). Cheers, Brett. _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to " [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> " -- George Vanev _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
