> -Original Message-
> From: owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org [mailto:owner-freebsd-
> questi...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Polytropon
> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 9:58 AM
> To: Carl Johnson
> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: Re: OT: Root acce
On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 09:15:45 -0800, Carl Johnson wrote:
> Damien Fleuriot writes:
>
> > On 12/29/11 10:58 AM, Polytropon wrote:
> >> On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 04:01:42 -0500, Irk Ed wrote:
> >>> For the first time, a customer is asking me for root access to said
> >>> customer's servers.
> >>
>
> >
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Irk Ed wrote:
> For the first time, a customer is asking me for root access to said
> customer's servers.
Are we talking about jail(8)- or server-level root access?
-cpghost.
--
Cordula's Web. http://www.cordula.ws/
Damien Fleuriot writes:
> On 12/29/11 10:58 AM, Polytropon wrote:
>> On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 04:01:42 -0500, Irk Ed wrote:
>>> For the first time, a customer is asking me for root access to said
>>> customer's servers.
>>
>>> Assuming that I'll be asked to continue administering said servers, I g
On Dec 29, 2011, at 4:01 AM, Irk Ed wrote:
> For the first time, a customer is asking me for root access to said
> customer's servers.
>
> Obviously, I must comply. At the same time, I cannot continue be
> accountable for those servers.
>
> Is this that simple and clear cut?
>
> Assuming that
On Thursday 29 December 2011, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
[snip]
> "sudo su -" or "sudo sh" and the customer gets a native root shell
> which does *not* log commands !
[snip]
> Say the customer can sudo commands located in
> /usr/local/libexec/CUSTOMER/
>
> All he has to do is write a simple link to
On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 11:23:31 +0100, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
> On 12/29/11 10:58 AM, Polytropon wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 04:01:42 -0500, Irk Ed wrote:
> >> Obviously, I must comply. At the same time, I cannot continue be
> >> accountable for those servers.
> >
> > Fully correct. Check the cont
On 12/29/11 10:58 AM, Polytropon wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 04:01:42 -0500, Irk Ed wrote:
>> For the first time, a customer is asking me for root access to said
>> customer's servers.
>
> Customer + root@server == !go; :-)
>
>
>
>> Obviously, I must comply. At the same time, I cannot contin
On 29/12/2011 09:01, Irk Ed wrote:
> For the first time, a customer is asking me for root access to said
> customer's servers.
>
> Obviously, I must comply. At the same time, I cannot continue be
> accountable for those servers.
>
> Is this that simple and clear cut?
>
> Assuming that I'll be as
On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 04:01:42 -0500, Irk Ed wrote:
> For the first time, a customer is asking me for root access to said
> customer's servers.
Customer + root@server == !go; :-)
> Obviously, I must comply. At the same time, I cannot continue be
> accountable for those servers.
Fully correct. Ch
For the first time, a customer is asking me for root access to said
customer's servers.
Obviously, I must comply. At the same time, I cannot continue be
accountable for those servers.
Is this that simple and clear cut?
Assuming that I'll be asked to continue administering said servers, I guess
I
11 matches
Mail list logo
