On 03/21/2017 11:03 PM, Jamil Nimeh wrote:
Honestly, I can't. I could see a sysadmin maybe moving a file like
foo.conf maybe to .foo.conf in order to "hide" it, but that wouldn't do
much now (it will still be processed) and now you have a situation where
the admin has a file being processed that doesn't readily show up in a
simple "ls." Point gun at foot, pull trigger.
Hopefully this won't happen.
Before supporting .conf, his old foo.conf was not processed. So he might
have never written that file.
I don't have a lot of
experience with Kerberos implementations,
No, I am not asking for Kerberos experiences. Just want to know if
people would accidentally create these files. For example, vi will
create .swp. I remember inserting a FAT USB disk into a Mac and some
mysterious files will be generated (alternative streams of resources?)
that is "._" plus original file names. Maybe I can report this to MIT
krb5 and ask if they are afraid of it.
so I can't think of a case
where the OS would do something like that. At least not for a
system-level config file. Maybe if there was a homedir-based conf
file...sometimes those are made as dot files (e.g. the local .ssh
directory...but that's a directory with non-hidden conf files inside).
Thanks
Max
