Sheldon Hearn wrote:
The FreeBSD 4.3 manpage says:
Only users who are a member of group 0 (normally ``wheel'') can su to
``root''. If group 0 is missing or empty, any user can su to
``root''.
I guess that could (at a stretch) be interpreted the same as OpenBSD's
On Tue, 31 Jul 2001 05:35:00 +0100, Joshua Goodall wrote:
The FreeBSD 4.3 manpage says:
Only users who are a member of group 0 (normally ``wheel'') can su to
``root''. If group 0 is missing or empty, any user can su to
``root''.
I guess that could (at a stretch) be
On 31-Jul-01 Terry Lambert wrote:
Sheldon Hearn wrote:
The FreeBSD 4.3 manpage says:
Only users who are a member of group 0 (normally ``wheel'') can su to
``root''. If group 0 is missing or empty, any user can su to
``root''.
I guess that could (at a stretch) be
On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Terry Lambert wrote:
The reason for this is that the pam code for doing the enforcement
is being trusted utterly. In the past, we would consider both
the primary group (the group from the passwd file entry), and the
auxillary groups (the groups from the groups file
I have the PR, and I will fix this :-)
M
On Tue, 31 Jul 2001, Terry Lambert wrote:
The reason for this is that the pam code for doing the enforcement
is being trusted utterly. In the past, we would consider both
the primary group (the group from the passwd file entry), and the
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:20:45 MST, Kris Kennaway wrote:
Isn't this backwards? Code shouldn't be making assumptions about the
special meaning of numeric gids. What if you wanted to renumber gid
wheel to something else?
So? My primary group is
On Wed, 25 Jul 2001 19:20:45 MST, Kris Kennaway wrote:
Isn't this backwards? Code shouldn't be making assumptions about the
special meaning of numeric gids. What if you wanted to renumber gid
wheel to something else?
So? My primary group is 0. In /etc/group, group wheel's numeric value
Hi folks,
I've completed a pretty clean crossgrade [1] to -CURRENT and find that
su is broken. I thought this had been fixed.
I have a virgin rev 1.17 /etc/pam.conf, I'm in group wheel, I built
world with no funky options, the su binary (built from su rev 1.39)
really is setuid root and yet I
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001 03:15:38 +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
I've completed a pretty clean crossgrade [1] to -CURRENT and find that
su is broken. I thought this had been fixed.
I have a virgin rev 1.17 /etc/pam.conf, I'm in group wheel, I built
world with no funky options, the su binary
On Thu, Jul 26, 2001 at 03:46:15AM +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001 03:15:38 +0200, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
I've completed a pretty clean crossgrade [1] to -CURRENT and find that
su is broken. I thought this had been fixed.
I have a virgin rev 1.17 /etc/pam.conf, I'm
10 matches
Mail list logo
