Re: Session IDs & LUID point to consider.

From: Linda Walsh (law@sgi.com)
Date: Sat Apr 22 2000 - 00:15:45 EST

Next message: Garst R. Reese: "Re: Problems umounting w/ pre5/pre6"
Previous message: Keith Owens: "Re: [RFC] Flat /lib/modules/`uname -r`"
In reply to: Horst von Brand: "Re: Session IDs & LUID point to consider."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Horst von Brand wrote:
> You could record the LUID which last changed the crontab file offline, and
> make crond(8) run it under that one.

--- That's an equally valid paradigm. One could argue that cron and at jobs should both run with the same LUID and UID.

However it's alot easier / predictable using the existing allow/deny mechanism, since you'd still have inaccuracies of LUID and action correspondence.

A new paradigm of each cronjob in a separate file in per-user dirs under 'tab' could allow reliable prediction if it was considered 'important' enough to make the design changes to cron.

-l

-- Linda A Walsh | Trust Technology, Core Linux, SGI law@sgi.com | Voice: (650) 933-5338

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Garst R. Reese: "Re: Problems umounting w/ pre5/pre6"
Previous message: Keith Owens: "Re: [RFC] Flat /lib/modules/`uname -r`"
In reply to: Horst von Brand: "Re: Session IDs & LUID point to consider."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 23 2000 - 21:00:20 EST