On Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 10:36:53AM +, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Sam Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think dpkg-statoverride is not too bad in this case. I'll talk to
the nis package maintainer and see if that's acceptable. If not, nis
could install
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Sam Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think dpkg-statoverride is not too bad in this case. I'll talk to
the nis package maintainer and see if that's acceptable. If not, nis
could install some flag file. The unix_chkpwd could start with root
privs, chuck for this
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Miquel van Smoorenburg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Sam Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think dpkg-statoverride is not too bad in this case. I'll talk to
the nis package maintainer and see if that's acceptable. If not, nis
could install
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 11:16:59PM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
Matt == Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Matt I think a single Will you be using NIS? question would be
Matt justified; this could provide defaults for md5 vs. crypt
Matt passwords and setuid-ness of
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 11:37:45AM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 11:16:59PM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
Matt == Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Matt I think a single Will you be using NIS? question would be
Matt justified; this could provide defaults
Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 11:37:45AM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
[...]
I'd rather see a solution where we have some nis support package that
makes unix_chkpwd setuid root when that support package is installed.
This would be even better.
Yes, that
Andreas == Andreas Metzler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andreas Steve Langasek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 11:37:45AM -0500, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
Andreas [...]
I'd rather see a solution where we have some nis support
package that makes unix_chkpwd
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 05:59:09PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
You are wrong, unix_chkpwd does NIS (at least in the szenario I just
tested). After changing unix_chkpwd from 4755 root:root to 2755
root:shadow a NIS user can not unlock the terminal he has just locked
himself with vlock
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 05:59:09PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
You are wrong, unix_chkpwd does NIS (at least in the szenario I just
tested). After changing unix_chkpwd from 4755 root:root to 2755
root:shadow a NIS user can not unlock the terminal he
On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 09:26:09PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 05:59:09PM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
The code does this:
if (strcmp(pwd-pw_passwd, *NP*) == 0) { /* NIS+
*/
[...]
Matt == Matt Zimmerman [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Matt I think a single Will you be using NIS? question would be
Matt justified; this could provide defaults for md5 vs. crypt
Matt passwords and setuid-ness of unix_chkpwd, and so those
Matt questions could be suppressed by default.
11 matches
Mail list logo
