"Niels M�ller" wrote:
>
> Adam Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > The basic idea here is to allow some users to have root access (killing
> > processes, accessing files) to a specified set of users, but obviously
> > not giving them complete root priveliges.
>
> Root privileges is probably the wrong word here. What you are talking
> about is introducing some kind of user hierachy, where each user has a
> "parent user". The user mechanism in lyskom (a conference system)
> works like that. Each user has an "organizer". Of you are logged in as
> a user, you have power over the any user for which you are organizer.
>
> > Implimentation:
> > - beyond adding and deleting users, I think all you'd need to modify is
> > the auth server, making it check the users root user, then that users
> > root user, on up until we either hit the full root (uid 0) or find that
> > the user has access. Otoh my knowledge of Hurd internals is quite
> > limited.
>
> Hmm. To me, it seems that a natural way to do this would be as
> follows:
>
> I start my own auth-server, which runs as me, with all my privileges.
> Then I start the untrusted script in such away that it has no
> privileges at all with the standard authserver (i.e. like the system's
> no-uid" user). However, it could talk to my auth-server, which could
> proxy some requests to the real auth server, and in that way delegate
> some of my privileges.
>
> In order to let the "sub-user" access files, I could either let it act
> as the "no-uid" user, and grant permissions to that. Or I could start
> my own filesystem server, and let it talk to my own auth-server.
>
> Is this doable in the Hurd architecture, or am I completely off? I
> think the crucial part here is how to locate the authserver and how to
> talk to it.
>
> /Niels
The real question here is if it's possible to prevent them from using
the normal hurd auth server. If you can't then it could always
circumvent the entire thing, unless it's the default server that's
modified to use subusers.
--
Rhamphoryncus
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"This is the first age that's paid much attention to the
future, which is a little ironic since we may not have one."
-- Arthur Clarke
