Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-19 Thread Nathaniel W Filardo
On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 12:59:04PM -0700, Benjamin Huntsman wrote: where you can't tweak things such that 100% of all administration activities can be performed remotely via drawterm... for some stuff like setting up disks, one still has to use the local physical terminal. I tend to add an

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-18 Thread Steve Simon
we use power switches in testing, in case we really wedge machines. Oh, is this a telnet capable mains switch? Is tehre a UK version, I have wanted such a thing for ages. -Steve

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-18 Thread dave . l
Oh, you can get them in the UK ...APC's stuff is telnet-able and very nice, but how many limbs can you afford?e.g. http://uk.insight.com/p/APCUA03N1K/apc-switched-rack-pdu-power-distribution-strip.html£306.99 ex VAT.HTH,Dave.On 18 Oct, 2010,at 10:05 AM, Steve Simon st...@quintile.net wrote: we use

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-18 Thread Bruce Ellis
shoot high, aim low. i'm unimpressed by the 24 hour fitness centre where the locker room is umm how do i say it ... naughty. i need a tazer for sexual NO! only a few hours 'til it happens again. i don't care if you want you to display your shaved genitalia but that's not gonna fix my arm. i know

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-18 Thread Dave Eckhardt
Oh, is this a telnet capable mains switch? Is tehre a UK version, I have wanted such a thing for ages. Bay Technical Associates (baytech.net) has a huge variety of these, many take 220V, many are available on eBay, maybe the sets don't intersect but I think they do. You need to be a bit

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-18 Thread Bruce Ellis
if you want to crash everything in sight try a 4096 bit key. all i wanted was a pepsi ... brucee On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 4:07 AM, Dave Eckhardt davide...@cs.cmu.edu wrote: Oh, is this a telnet capable mains switch? Is tehre a UK version, I have wanted such a thing for ages. Bay Technical

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread Skip Tavakkolian
group membership checking is up to the particular file server. if it doesn't implement it, it wont be enforced. -Skip On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 10:35 PM, Benjamin Huntsman bhunts...@mail2.cu-portland.edu wrote: I probably need to go read the papers regarding permissions 10 more times, but this

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread erik quanstrom
On Sun Oct 17 02:02:07 EDT 2010, skip.tavakkol...@gmail.com wrote: group membership checking is up to the particular file server. if it doesn't implement it, it wont be enforced. to elaborate: group permission is not implemented by any kernel file servers in the standard distribution. only a

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread Benjamin Huntsman
: Sat 10/16/2010 11:19 PM To: 9fans@9fans.net Subject: Re: [9fans] permissions On Sun Oct 17 02:02:07 EDT 2010, skip.tavakkol...@gmail.com wrote: group membership checking is up to the particular file server. if it doesn't implement it, it wont be enforced. to elaborate: group permission

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread erik quanstrom
to elaborate: group permission is not implemented by any kernel file servers in the standard distribution. And yet, it honors others permissions? I can set the r bit on others, and the cat then works... many fileservers assume that a user is always a member of a group of the same name. i

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread blstuart
to elaborate: group permission is not implemented by any kernel file servers in the standard distribution. And yet, it honors others permissions? I can set the r bit on others, and the cat then works... Right. Aside from the persistent data file servers, like kfs, kenfs, and fossil (as Erik

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread erik quanstrom
world permission. Take a look at /sys/src/lib9p/uid.c to see the actual implementation. amazing but true, if you're used to other other systems. you can find, read and undertand plan 9 code quickly. - erik

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread ron minnich
It's worth mentioning that the /adm/users contents have no effect whatsoever on the permission checking for /dev/nvram. ron

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread Benjamin Huntsman
Right. Aside from the persistent data file servers, like kfs, kenfs, and fossil (as Erik mentioned), there's not much that treats groups in the expected way. So if you'll continue to pardon my asking, who exactly tells a given file server what constitutes a user or a group? In this particular

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread erik quanstrom
Right. Aside from the persistent data file servers, like kfs, kenfs, and fossil (as Erik mentioned), there's not much that treats groups in the expected way. So if you'll continue to pardon my asking, who exactly tells a given file server what constitutes a user or a group? In this

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread blstuart
Right. Aside from the persistent data file servers, like kfs, kenfs, and fossil (as Erik mentioned), there's not much that treats groups in the expected way. So if you'll continue to pardon my asking, who exactly tells a given file server what constitutes a user or a group? In this

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread Benjamin Huntsman
...Plus, there's a chicken and egg problem. The server which gives you /dev/sd00/nvram has to approve of the attach when fossil wants to open its /dev/sd00/fossil, but until fossil has opened it, there's no way of knowing what's in /adm/users on that particular fossil. So for in-kernel file

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread blstuart
Chicken-and-egg, just like you said. Of course, that lands us in the current situation, where you can't tweak things such that 100% of all administration activities can be performed remotely via drawterm... for some stuff like setting up disks, one still has to use the local physical

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread Benjamin Huntsman
That starts to get into almost philosophical security issues. To some extent I consider this a good thing. Physical access is the ultimate privilige, so you need to physically protect your data to the extent that it's worth to you. If you've got physical protection anyway, then making physical

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread blstuart
servers out in our datacenter, which is a physically seperate building down the street. While we have physical access if we need it, generally speaking everything can be done remotely, including rebooting a system, because the HMC manages it and provides virtual serial consoles. Real world

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread erik quanstrom
If I were running a Plan 9 server on bare hardware in the datacenter, I wouldn't want to have to take a hike every time I needed to do certain activities, even though my key to the datacenter door grants me physical access should I need it. In this case, though, it's running under VMware

Re: [9fans] permissions

2010-10-17 Thread erik quanstrom
set. In fact, there's no requirement that the intersection of the sets be non-empty. it's typically assumed that the intersection is not empty. So for in-kernel file servers, it's best to look at them as hostowner and world and forget about groups. For lib9p based servers, you can link in

[9fans] permissions

2010-10-16 Thread Benjamin Huntsman
I probably need to go read the papers regarding permissions 10 more times, but this just doesn't seem right to me. I'm logged in as 'ben' via drawterm: cpu% cat /adm/users adm:adm:adm:sys,bootes,ben ben:ben::adm,sys bootes:bootes::ben glenda:glenda:glenda: none:none:: noworld:noworld::