Re: Permissions of /var/log.

2000-04-03 Thread Santiago Vila
reassign 35504 base-files retitle 35504 /var/log should be 755 and root.root severity 35504 fixed thanks [ fixed in base-files_2.1.20 ]. I consider this proposal rejected, because there has been a formal objection and no seconds. I think I was interpreting Wichert's words too much literally:

Processed: Re: Permissions of /var/log.

2000-04-03 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: reassign 35504 base-files Bug#35504: [PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log. Bug reassigned from package `debian-policy' to `base-files'. retitle 35504 /var/log should be 755 and root.root Bug#35504: [PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log. Changed Bug title

Bug#35504: PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-31 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Mark Baker wrote: They probably should be group adm, though. No, group mail is a valid group for these logfiles (it allows listmasters to check the logs for example). Wichert. -- / Generally uninteresting

Re: Bug#35504: PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-31 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Fri, 31 Mar 2000, Wichert Akkerman wrote: No, group mail is a valid group for these logfiles (it allows listmasters to check the logs for example). Too many other things are group mail for that to be reasonable, like user mail boxes for instance. Stuff that is adm is limited to log files

Bug#35504: PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-31 Thread Josip Rodin
On Thu, Mar 30, 2000 at 09:21:17PM +0100, Mark Baker wrote: exim for example uses mail.mail for ownership of its log files, but mode 640... They probably should be group adm, though. Please change them to adm, then. -- Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and

Re: Bug#35504: PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-30 Thread Jason Gunthorpe
On Thu, 30 Mar 2000, Mark Baker wrote: They probably should be group adm, though. I would like that, it is annoying to have to add all the admin people to all sorts of groups (with unknown other repercussions) just so they can read logs. I think group adm should allow the reading of most, if

Re: [PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-29 Thread Marco d'Itri
On Mar 28, Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The /var/log directory should have permissions 2775 (group-writable and set-group-id) and be owned by root.adm. Rationale: root.adm is a better default than root.root. This isn't a rationale, it's more like a joke. Please explain the purpose

Re: [PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-29 Thread ferret
Better yet, read-only access to group adm and no access to world? So permissions 275.? Should the /var/log directory be itself be viewable/listable by world? On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Marco d'Itri wrote: On Mar 28, Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The /var/log directory should have

Bug#35504: [PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-29 Thread Manoj Srivastava
Santiago == Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Previously Santiago Vila wrote: How do we want these files to be? a) All of them should be root.root. b) All of them should be root.adm. c) This should not be covered by policy. I would say c) and let common sense decide.

Bug#35504: [PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-29 Thread Santiago Vila
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Wichert Akkerman wrote: Previously Santiago Vila wrote: The /var/log directory should have permissions 2775 (group-writable and set-group-id) and be owned by root.adm. Why group writeable? Good question. These are the permissions Bruce Perens gave to the /var/log

Bug#35504: PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-29 Thread Seth R Arnold
* Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] [000329 01:47]: --- The /var/log directory should have permissions 2755 (set-group-id) and be owned by root.adm. ---

Bug#35504: [PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-29 Thread Branden Robinson
On Tue, Mar 28, 2000 at 12:02:18PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: Proposal: (to be inserted into an appropriate place in the policy docs) The /var/log directory should have permissions 2775 (group-writable and set-group-id) and be owned by root.adm. Rationale: root.adm is a better

Bug#35504: PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-29 Thread Santiago Vila
On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Branden Robinson wrote: On Tue, Mar 28, 2000 at 12:02:18PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: Proposal: (to be inserted into an appropriate place in the policy docs) The /var/log directory should have permissions 2775 (group-writable and set-group-id) and be

Bug#35504: PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-29 Thread Santiago Vila
On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Seth R Arnold wrote: * Santiago Vila [EMAIL PROTECTED] [000329 01:47]: --- The /var/log directory should have permissions 2755 (set-group-id) and be owned by root.adm.

Bug#35504: PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-29 Thread Josip Rodin
On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 01:56:31PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote: --- The /var/log directory should have permissions 2755 (set-group-id) and be owned by root.adm.

Bug#35504: PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-29 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Herbert Xu wrote: This is going to allow adm members to delete/create logfiles, probably not what you intended. And modify even.. Wichert. -- / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \ |

[PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-28 Thread Santiago Vila
reassign 35504 debian-policy retitle 35504 [PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log. severity 35504 wishlist thanks Some time ago I asked about permissions of /var/log, it's time to do something about it. On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Wichert Akkerman wrote: Previously Santiago Vila wrote: How do we want

Processed: [PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-28 Thread Debian Bug Tracking System
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]: reassign 35504 debian-policy Bug#35504: base2_1.tgz: ownership/permissions of /var/log (?). Bug reassigned from package `base-files' to `debian-policy'. retitle 35504 [PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log. Bug#35504: base2_1.tgz: ownership/permissions

Re: [PROPOSAL] Permissions of /var/log.

2000-03-28 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Santiago Vila wrote: The /var/log directory should have permissions 2775 (group-writable and set-group-id) and be owned by root.adm. Why group writeable? Wichert. -- / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore

Permissions of /var/log

2000-01-25 Thread Santiago Vila
Hello. Some files in /var/log are root.adm, while some others are root.root. How do we want these files to be? a) All of them should be root.root. b) All of them should be root.adm. c) This should not be covered by policy. I would like to hear opinions about this. Thanks. --

Re: Permissions of /var/log

2000-01-25 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Santiago Vila wrote: How do we want these files to be? a) All of them should be root.root. b) All of them should be root.adm. c) This should not be covered by policy. I would say c) and let common sense decide. Generally the idea is: 1. logfiles which don't contain sensitive

Re: Permissions of /var/log

2000-01-25 Thread Brock Rozen
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000 at 15:59, Santiago Vila wrote about Permissions of...: a) All of them should be root.root. b) All of them should be root.adm. c) This should not be covered by policy. I think an equally important question should be the permissions on such files. Some files should

Re: Permissions of /var/log

2000-01-25 Thread Jean-Christophe . Dubacq
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Wichert Akkerman wrote: Previously Santiago Vila wrote: How do we want these files to be? a) All of them should be root.root. b) All of them should be root.adm. c) This should not be covered by policy. I would say c) and let common sense decide. Generally the

Re: Permissions of /var/log

2000-01-25 Thread Santiago Vila
On Tue, 25 Jan 2000, Wichert Akkerman wrote: Previously Santiago Vila wrote: How do we want these files to be? a) All of them should be root.root. b) All of them should be root.adm. c) This should not be covered by policy. I would say c) and let common sense decide. Generally the