Mark Foster wrote:
Alas, setuid (and maybe setgid) do not just "work" with my perl, which
is from freebsd ports (perl-5.8.0). IIRC setuid capability is a
compile-time choice, so many systems may not come with that enabled... I
don't know. The other factor influencing the decision to not use setuid
in the case of just a unix socket was the decreased likelihood of
network-based attacks. Maybe a good direction to take this, is to have
spfd do the setuid/setgid stuff, but warn (instead of die) on failure?
Uhm, why?
From a security standpoint I'd much rather have my program bail if it
can't give up root priviliges rather than warn me. If your perl doesn't
handle dropping root priviliges then don't ask spfd to do so.
I'm sorry to respond so strongly to this, but this is a privilege drop
situation; similarly I don't believe a process should warn if a chroot()
call fails, it should die() immediately.
-------
Sender Permitted From: http://spf.pobox.com/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
Latest draft at http://spf.pobox.com/draft-mengwong-spf-02.9.4.txt
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname(_at_)©#«Mo\¯HÝÜîU;±¤Ö¤Íµø?¡