If a user wants to (makes the mistake of) let others delete their files,
it's not your job to teach them otherwise. Compare to real life;
someone leaves a bike on the street unlocked and someone else steals it.
Does it make sense to file a complaint to the police department about not
educating
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 8:12 AM, Jaroslav Rakhmatoullin
jazzos...@gmail.com wrote:
If a user wants to (makes the mistake of) let others delete their files,
it's not your job to teach them otherwise. Compare to real life; someone
leaves a bike on the street unlocked and someone else steals it.
I suspect I may get laughed off the list... but would you folks ever
consider restricting the use of chmod such that world-writable files
are reserved for 1) /tmp-style permissions (1777) or 2) reserved for
root-only users? Despite training (berating?) users, it seems the
default reaction to oh
And the kernel devs would never allow it. You may still want to patch
your local systems, either chmod or the kernel. However, this will
not be accepted upstream.
Although it might not be apparent, do I understand this. It would be
trivial to write a perl program to replace chmod and permit
On 06/27/2013 1:03 pm, Ben Lentz wrote:
And the kernel devs would never allow it. You may still want to patch
your local systems, either chmod or the kernel. However, this will
not
be accepted upstream.
My suggestion was merely meant to insight thought in the user
attempting to set files
Ben Lentz wrote:
I suspect I may get laughed off the list... but would you folks ever
consider restricting the use of chmod such that world-writable files
are reserved for 1) /tmp-style permissions (1777) or 2) reserved for
root-only users? Despite training (berating?) users, it seems the
