Re: nobody's shell // was Re: [Eug-lug]mail to root under postfix ?

2003-02-07 Thread Jacob Meuser
On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 09:43:59AM -0800, Horst wrote: > 1) Talking about nobody -- what should be his/her shell ? > My distro decided on /bin/sh whereas some system accounts are assigned > to /bin/false (or true), neither giving them much power. > I guess I could try and wait until some applica

Re: nobody's shell // was Re: [Eug-lug]mail to root under postfix?

2003-02-07 Thread Horst
On Fri, 7 Feb 2003, Bob Miller wrote: ... > > /bin/false is good. /bin/sh is less good. *maybe*, due to an error Thanks, Bob ! .. > > I'm surprised that there's no entry in /etc/shadow. md5 passwords are KDE User Manager did that (no entry in shadow) -I just confirmed one more time. ==> I'll

Re: nobody's shell // was Re: [Eug-lug]mail to root under postfix ?

2003-02-07 Thread Bob Miller
Horst wrote: > 1) Talking about nobody -- what should be his/her shell ? > My distro decided on /bin/sh whereas some system accounts are assigned > to /bin/false (or true), neither giving them much power. > I guess I could try and wait until some application using nobody > breaks... but maybe y

nobody's shell // was Re: [Eug-lug]mail to root under postfix ?

2003-02-07 Thread Horst
1) Talking about nobody -- what should be his/her shell ? My distro decided on /bin/sh whereas some system accounts are assigned to /bin/false (or true), neither giving them much power. I guess I could try and wait until some application using nobody breaks... but maybe you folks wanna spoil tha