At 6:55 PM +0200 9/21/05, Alexander Boström wrote:
I like my PAGs unprotected. That is, without the setgroups wrapper.
I am not completely sure I understand what you mean by that, but I'll ask a few questions based on what I *think* you mean. What I am thinking of is more accurately "without PAGs" instead of "with unprotected PAGs", so it's quite possible I am thinking of the wrong thing...
In case you wonder, my reasons for preferring unprotected PAGs include: I don't need protected PAGs and my users won't notice the difference. Since the syscall table thing is a bit controversial, avoiding it seems like a good idea.
Will this cause you problems when the same user starts multiple sessions? If I'm on box-A, and ssh into box-B, and ssh into box-B a second time, then what happens to the first box-B connection when the second one logs out? What happens to the first session if the second session does a klog to some alternate userid?
Getting out of a PAG can be useful sometimes, for example when starting deamons. If httpd is allowed to, it will break out of the PAG (if started from a PAG:d shell). That means that the problem of getting into the same PAG as httpd disappears, which makes it possible to use cron to update the token for the httpd user.
Why not just start daemons from a pag-less shell? I either login to root via a serial console, or I have some another daemon which is launched at startup (and thus has no PAG). I then tell *that* daemon to start the daemon(s) I want to start up without a pag. -- Garance Alistair Drosehn = [EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Systems Programmer or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute or [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
