Tom H wrote:
> David Guntner wrote:
> > Of course, I'm a LONG-time UNIX user/admin, and back in the day, setting
> > the login shell that way was pretty much the way to do it. As someone
> > else here pointed out, doing a "passwd -l" doesn't actually *disable*
> > the account and allows someone who
John Hasler grabbed a keyboard and wrote:
> Tom H writes:
>> Sure, that works, too - however, you'll have to edit /etc/shells to
>> include /bin/false and/or /usr/sbin/nologin, 'cause those aren't "valid"
>> login shells by default.
>
> That restriction does not apply to root.
Ok, that's good to
Tom H writes:
> Sure, that works, too - however, you'll have to edit /etc/shells to
> include /bin/false and/or /usr/sbin/nologin, 'cause those aren't "valid"
> login shells by default.
That restriction does not apply to root.
--
John Hasler
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@list
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 3:46 PM, David Guntner wrote:
> Tom H grabbed a keyboard and wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Beco wrote:
>>> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Lars Noodén wrote:
>>> I don't want to look one by one. There should be a way to process them in
>>> batch.
>
> I
John Hasler wrote:
> Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > The OP is trying to lock a large batch of students (I think 3 or 4
> > figures) out for the duration of the vacation. Two students have to
> > be left with access. But to lock each of the others out individually
> > would be a big deal, and the OP is loo
Lisi Reisz wrote:
> The OP is trying to lock a large batch of students (I think 3 or 4
> figures) out for the duration of the vacation. Two students have to
> be left with access. But to lock each of the others out individually
> would be a big deal, and the OP is looking for a method that would
On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 10:23:09PM +, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Monday 24 December 2012 20:46:31 David Guntner wrote:
> > I think I missed part of this thread Look at what one by one?
>
> The OP is trying to lock a large batch of students (I think 3 or 4 figures)
> out for the duration of t
On Monday 24 December 2012 20:46:31 David Guntner wrote:
> I think I missed part of this thread Look at what one by one?
The OP is trying to lock a large batch of students (I think 3 or 4 figures)
out for the duration of the vacation. Two students have to be left with
access. But to lock
Lars Noodén wrote:
> Eero Volotinen wrote:
> > Lars Noodén wrote:
> >> Another way would be to try 'passwd -l' to lock the accounts and then
> >> later use 'passwd -u' to unlock them.
> >
> > Does it also work for ssh public keys also? I think recommended way is
> > to use chage: http://linux.die.
Tom H grabbed a keyboard and wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Beco wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Lars Noodén wrote:
>>
>> I don't want to look one by one. There should be a way to process them in
>> batch.
I think I missed part of this thread Look at what one by one
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Beco wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Lars Noodén wrote:
>
> I don't want to look one by one. There should be a way to process them in
> batch.
>
> I find David's idea of editing passwd dangerous and annoying. It would
> be ok to change a single user,
On 12/23/2012 06:26 PM, Eero Volotinen wrote:
> 2012/12/23 Lars Noodén :
>> On 12/23/2012 06:01 PM, Beco wrote:
>>> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Lars Noodén wrote:
Although it says that the allow/deny directives are processed in the
following order DenyUsers, AllowUsers, DenyGr
2012/12/23 Lars Noodén :
> On 12/23/2012 06:01 PM, Beco wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Lars Noodén wrote:
>>>
>>> Although it says that the allow/deny directives are processed in the
>>> following order DenyUsers, AllowUsers, DenyGroups, and AllowGroups, it
>>> does not say if the fir
On 12/23/2012 06:01 PM, Beco wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Lars Noodén wrote:
>>
>> Although it says that the allow/deny directives are processed in the
>> following order DenyUsers, AllowUsers, DenyGroups, and AllowGroups, it
>> does not say if the first match or last match is what
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 11:29 AM, Lars Noodén wrote:
>
> Although it says that the allow/deny directives are processed in the
> following order DenyUsers, AllowUsers, DenyGroups, and AllowGroups, it
> does not say if the first match or last match is what is applied. I've
> tried a little experim
Beco grabbed a keyboard and wrote:
> Dear userix,
>
> I have a server with lots of students accounts, and some professors and
> admins.
>
> I wonder, what would be an easy way to freeze students access now,
> stopping them from logging via SSH, and reinstating them on February?
>
> They are par
On 12/23/2012 03:47 PM, Beco wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Lars Noodén wrote:
>> On 12/23/2012 03:26 PM, Beco wrote:
>>> Dear userix,
>>>
>>> I have a server with lots of students accounts, and some professors and
>>> admins.
>>>
>>> I wonder, what would be an easy way to freeze stud
On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 10:29 AM, Lars Noodén wrote:
> On 12/23/2012 03:26 PM, Beco wrote:
>> Dear userix,
>>
>> I have a server with lots of students accounts, and some professors and
>> admins.
>>
>> I wonder, what would be an easy way to freeze students access now,
>> stopping them from loggin
On 12/23/2012 03:26 PM, Beco wrote:
> Dear userix,
>
> I have a server with lots of students accounts, and some professors and
> admins.
>
> I wonder, what would be an easy way to freeze students access now,
> stopping them from logging via SSH, and reinstating them on February?
>
> They are pa
Dear userix,
I have a server with lots of students accounts, and some professors and admins.
I wonder, what would be an easy way to freeze students access now,
stopping them from logging via SSH, and reinstating them on February?
They are part of a "group" if that helps.
Thanks,
Beco
--
Dr
20 matches
Mail list logo
