On 2020-08-06 18:40:50 -0500, Derek Martin wrote: > Are you serious, Vincent? I'm pretty sure you well know that this is > a horrible idea, clearly contrary to best security practices, that no > competent sysadmin managing servers holding anything vaguely sensitive > would ever allow on a multi-user system (and we've already established > that systems only ever used by one human render the configurable umask > moot). This is system security 101 (e.g. SANS GSEC). Users to > usernames are 1:1.
This is complete nonsense. I am the sysadmin and the only user of my own machines. I naturally use different usernames for various tasks when it makes sense. This is even recommended by some software (e.g. Subversion, so that the user cannot break his repository by mistake). > And remember, what we're trading here is the, what, 3 seconds it takes > for the user to type "chmod 644 *" (or similar) if they really want to > do this. If this can be done by the user safely, then there is no problem if this is done automatically by Mutt at the user's request. -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)
