Re: [SECURITY] [DSA 955-1] New mailman packages fix denial of service

Hi! Probably some cut & waste error from DSA 947-2: On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 12:33:51PM +0100, Michael Stone wrote: > Subject: [SECURITY] [DSA 955-1] New mailman packages fix denial of service ~~~ > -

Re: Security implications of tty group?

Thomas Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What are the security implications of a tty device node failing to belong > to group "tty"? It depends on who has access to that group, what are the permissions of the tty and what is intended. Generally you want to restrict write access to a tty to a trus

Re: Security implications of tty group?

Florian Weimer wrote: > In other words, the warning makes perfect sense. Would it also be secure if (as the submitter of #349578 writes): > The tty is /dev/pts/* and is always owned and group-owned by me. ? That is, should the warning be suppressed in that case? -- Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE

Re: Security implications of tty group?

* Thomas Hood: > Florian Weimer wrote: >> In other words, the warning makes perfect sense. > > > Would it also be secure if (as the submitter of #349578 writes): This hasn't got to do much with security. >> The tty is /dev/pts/* and is always owned and group-owned by me. > > ? That is, should t

Re: Security implications of tty group?

* Thomas Hood: > Hello, security experts. > > In #349578 it is claimed that the mesg program should not warn if a tty > device node fails to belong to group "tty". > > What are the security implications of a tty device node failing to belong > to group "tty"? "mesg y" does not have the desired ef

Security implications of tty group?

Hello, security experts. In #349578 it is claimed that the mesg program should not warn if a tty device node fails to belong to group "tty". What are the security implications of a tty device node failing to belong to group "tty"? Please CC: me as I am not subscribed to this list. -- Thomas Hoo