December 2004 - WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Re: [Wlug] lock down /etc

by Charles R. Anderson

On Fri, Dec 31, 2004 at 03:13:09PM -0500, Brett Russ wrote: > If there's a way to distinguish between the two types of accesses I > don't know what it is. SELinux can do this.

Dec. 31, 2004

Re: [Wlug] lock down /etc

by Brett Russ

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:54:20 -0500, Justin Odom <justin.odom(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Not sure if anyone has experience with this, but I would like to lock > down the /etc directory so common users cannot run through the > directory and read all the files. However, programs still need to be > able to read the files to work. I'm not sure you can achieve what you're after--either a user can read the file or he can't. If you turn off read perms for a user, then programs running as that user also will be disallowed. If there's a way to distinguish between the two types of accesses I don't know what it is. Otherwise, maybe you should look into extended attributes--you'll need a filesystem that supports them. ReiserFS and ext3 both do, as do most others I'm sure. BR

Dec. 31, 2004

Re: [Wlug] lock down /etc

by Chuck Haines

Haha, I think that Justin means is that he has some users who think they know about Linux and keep perusing the /etc files and telling him what is wrong with them. That's my best guess. Though I think the people might be right, maybe Justin is just tired of hearing from them :) CH On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 13:40:46 -0800 (PST), Mike Leo <mleo963(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > yes....fire those users. > > Other than that...i got nothin' > > --- Justin Odom <justin.odom(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Not sure if anyone has experience with this, but I > > would like to lock > > down the /etc directory so common users cannot run > > through the > > directory and read all the files. However, programs > > still need to be > > able to read the files to work. > > > > I'm trying to do this because we have several users > > on our system that > > like to peruse the files within /etc. > > > > Anyone have any suggestions? > > > > Thanks for your help, > > > > Justin > > _______________________________________________ > > Wlug mailing list > > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > -- Chuck Haines chaines(a)gmail.com ------------------------------------------- Tau Kappa Epsilon Fraternity TKE-ZM Web Coordinator ECE Systems Administrator ------------------------------------------- AIM: CyberGrex YIM: CyberGrex_27 ICQ: 3707881 ------------------------------------------- GPG Fingerprint: 303A AB50 4EA9 70ED 2E30 2368 C9CD CCB5 4BD7 0989 GPG Key: http://www.maxslack.com/gpgkey.txt

Dec. 31, 2004

Re: [Wlug] cheap Compaq at Staples

by Gary Hanley

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004, Brian Waite wrote: > Hyperthreading and hypertransport are vastly different beasts. Right, but the comment wasn't that they were either different or similar - it was that AMD isn't selling hypertransport while Intel is selling hyperthreading. > Where hyperthreading performance can be described by marketeers as > making your app go fatster, hypertransport will speed up everything, > but it is difficult to quantify and thus marketeers can't sell it. True. However Intel is doing quite well with "Centrino" and I'd bet most people who buy "Centrino" have no idea what it is. (No one here, of course!) My own conspiracy theory is that when Intel realized AMD was not selling hypertransport they way they should they named hyperthreading as such to create confusion with the two features. If masses hear Intel barking "hyperthreading" all the time they will assume AMD is talking about the same thing if they ever hear "hypertransport" Eh, it's my paranoid conspiracy theory. I'm sticking to it. :-) -- Gary

Dec. 31, 2004

Re: [Wlug] cheap Compaq at Staples

by Brian Waite

On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 07:10:36 -0500 (EST), Gary Hanley <gary(a)hanley.net> wrote: > On Thu, 23 Dec 2004, Charles R. Anderson wrote: > > Those are Hyperthreading Pentium 4's, > > Yea, but Hyperthreading is a nice idea that is still somewhat irrelevant > at this stage. Even with dual-cores on the horizon there has is lots of > optimizations to do before any of this power is utilized. > > More relevant now is Hypertransport, which for some reason AMD doesn't > brag about as must as Intel does for Hyperthreading. Hyperthreading and hypertransport are vastly different beasts. Hyperthreading creates two "virtual" processors on a single CPU. Here is a good description of hyperthreading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyper-threading. Hypertransport, on the other hand is a chip to chip transport. It is a serial interface that makes the bits go faster. It is basically the bus logic and thus far too technical to be interesting to the marketing types. Where hyperthreading performance can be described by marketeers as making your app go fatster, hypertransport will speed up everything, but it is difficult to quantify and thus marketeers can't sell it. Just my 2 cents. Thanks Brian > > -- Gary > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug >

Dec. 30, 2004

Re: [Wlug] lock down /etc

by Mike Leo

yes....fire those users. Other than that...i got nothin' --- Justin Odom <justin.odom(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Not sure if anyone has experience with this, but I > would like to lock > down the /etc directory so common users cannot run > through the > directory and read all the files. However, programs > still need to be > able to read the files to work. > > I'm trying to do this because we have several users > on our system that > like to peruse the files within /etc. > > Anyone have any suggestions? > > Thanks for your help, > > Justin > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Dec. 30, 2004

Re: [Wlug] lock down /etc

by Charles R. Anderson

On Thu, Dec 30, 2004 at 01:54:20PM -0500, Justin Odom wrote: > I'm trying to do this because we have several users on our system that > like to peruse the files within /etc. > > Anyone have any suggestions? SELinux with the strict policy may be able to help here, but it would require a lot of hand policy writing and domain transitions for every program. Another possibility is to chroot users to their home directories. This has its own problems.

Dec. 30, 2004

Re: [Wlug] lock down /etc

by Brian J. Conway

On Thu, 30 Dec 2004, Justin Odom wrote: > Not sure if anyone has experience with this, but I would like to lock > down the /etc directory so common users cannot run through the > directory and read all the files. However, programs still need to be > able to read the files to work. > > I'm trying to do this because we have several users on our system that > like to peruse the files within /etc. > > Anyone have any suggestions? I don't know of any automated way to do it, but most critical files should already be locked down by default from prying eyes, and anything you specifically want to hide from users can be done easily by the normal permissions/ownership means for whatever user a daemon is running as. Are you trying to hide away that pesky /etc/hosts? ;) Brian J. Conway bconway(at)alum.wpi.edu "LINUX is obsolete" - Andrew S. Tanenbaum, creator of Minix - Jan 29, 1992

Dec. 30, 2004

lock down /etc

by Justin Odom

Not sure if anyone has experience with this, but I would like to lock down the /etc directory so common users cannot run through the directory and read all the files. However, programs still need to be able to read the files to work. I'm trying to do this because we have several users on our system that like to peruse the files within /etc. Anyone have any suggestions? Thanks for your help, Justin

Dec. 30, 2004

Re: [Wlug] Trouble with SATA DVD burner

by Karl Hiramoto

The linux kernel developers broke some stuff after 2.6.8 and there are docs on the cdrecord site. http://www.fokus.fhg.de/research/cc/glone/employees/joerg.schilling/private… Andy Stewart wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Hash: SHA1 > >On Tuesday 28 December 2004 12:47 am, Andy Stewart wrote: > > >>HI all, >> >>I'm having problems with an SATA DVD burner (Plextor 712). I can't get >>Linux to see it. Any advice you might offer would be appreciated. >> >> > >Well, I got it working with SuSE's kernel version 2.6.5-7.111.19-smp, but that >doesn't explain to me why I can't make it work with a stock 2.6.10 kernel. >Now I'm hitting the "kernel madness" which broke CD/DVD burning for all but >the root user. > >I also checked my firware revs, all of which are up to date. > >I'll still take any advice about why 2.6.10 didn't work for me. > >Thanks, > >Andy > >- -- >Andy Stewart, Founder >Worcester Linux Users' Group >Worcester, MA USA >http://www.wlug.org >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) > >iD4DBQFB0ZKwHl0iXDssISsRAjKtAJdZnVZUIpo4CtW/0mIGCqdmQ71PAJ9Nxa2U >lQ2plaRVtgIS+ErBFsdOJA== >=K7D5 >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > >_______________________________________________ >Wlug mailing list >Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org >http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug > > -- --- Karl Hiramoto <karl(a)hiramoto.org> US VOIP: 603.966.4448 Spain Home from US 011(34) 952.827.554 Spain Home from EU 00 (34) 952.827.554 Spain Mobil 011 (34) 617.463.826 Yahoo_IM = karl_hiramoto jabber.org=karl_hiramoto ------ - Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? se

Dec. 28, 2004