> Is there any desire to provide consistent input/output for this to be
> used in scripting? (Or are we simply going to expect application
> consumers to call uadmin(2) directly?)
I've not read the current proposal, but as I believe Randy
does know: ALL callers of uadmin(2) MUST deal with authorization
and audit or the system will not work as desired after these
calls to uadmin(2). uadmin(1) and a few other applications
such as halt(1) and the links to halt(1) do this correctly.
Please, please do not suggest using uadmin(2) to any projects
that have not contacted the security project teams, in particular
the Audit team.
Gary..
P.S. I'll be reading and +1 or commenting soon. I just wanted to get
this comment public before my review.
