delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs> |
Sender: | cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: | yes |
Path: | not-for-mail |
From: | Andrew DeFaria <Andrew AT DeFaria DOT com> |
Newsgroups: | gmane.os.cygwin |
Subject: | Re: login: no shell: /bin/bash: Permission denied |
Date: | Thu, 07 Mar 2002 07:44:22 -0800 |
Lines: | 43 |
Message-ID: | <3C878AD6.3020307@DeFaria.com> |
References: | <m3eliylhc2 DOT fsf AT appel DOT lilypond DOT org> <20020306101433 DOT P13590 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <3C866A0B DOT 6040500 AT DeFaria DOT com> <20020306213202 DOT C13590 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> <3C869077 DOT 3090705 AT DeFaria DOT com> <20020307102348 DOT N13590 AT cygbert DOT vinschen DOT de> |
NNTP-Posting-Host: | dsl-64-195-250-225.telocity.com |
Mime-Version: | 1.0 |
X-Trace: | quimby2.netfonds.no 1015516264 17398 64.195.250.225 (7 Mar 2002 15:51:04 GMT) |
X-Complaints-To: | usenet AT quimby2 DOT netfonds DOT no |
NNTP-Posting-Date: | 7 Mar 2002 15:51:04 GMT |
User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:0.9.4) Gecko/20011128 Netscape6/6.2.1 |
X-Accept-Language: | en,ru |
Corinna Vinschen wrote: > On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 01:56:07PM -0800, Andrew DeFaria wrote: > >>OK then, seems to me that su might be implementable by using a service >>that runs as SYSTEM and takes requests to switch user from user A to >>user B. Possible? >> > > Sure. It's exactly the way the user switch is implemented in 2K/XP. So then su can be implemented in Cygwin. > >>Regardless, to me it's still would be a large security hole if all one >>needs to do is: >> >>$ echo "+" > ~/.rhosts >> >>to be able to abuse rsh to do something under somebody else's user ID is >>it not? >> > > It's the same on U*X. If you don't care for the permissions of > your home directory you're out of luck. No it's not! As I've said repeatedly already a ~/.rhosts need not exist. Also, it does not seem to matter if my home directory is locked down or not. If user A wishs to login as user B and user A can create files in his own home directory (and even if he can't since the presence of ~usera/.rhosts is not required) all user A needs to do is use rsh with a -l userb parameter to execute commands as user B. This is not the same as on Unix. > And rsh is a dangerous service anyway. If you don't want it, > just remove the matching line in /etc/inetd.conf and use ssh. Ah but I *want* rsh. I just want it to work correctly. :-) -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |