Paul Howarth wrote:
Mike McCarty wrote:
Alexander Dalloz wrote:
Am Fr, den 08.07.2005 schrieb Shawn um 8:13:
quite recently I mistakenly did something like chown -R jr /
[snip]
I wonder if etc and boot shouldn't properly be owned by root?
Sure, they have to be root owned.
They *have* to be root ownership? What is there which will not function
if they are not root ownership?
Anything that was originally owned by root will "work" as before, but
represents a potential security issue as user "jr" will now have
access to them and that user should not have that access.
Please use shorter lines.
That is not much of a security hole. OTOH, given the propensities
of this particular user...
Just kidding!
Anything that was originally owned by a different user than root is
likely not to work, because the process that needs to access that data
will be running as the correct userid, not "jr".
Yes, like the news reader, perhaps. But you didn't address my question as
asked. What, specifically, *must* be owned by root?
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
