Le 22/12/2011 19:21, Brad Mettee a écrit :
On 12/22/2011 12:58 PM, Bastien Semene wrote:
Hi list,
I'm trying to apply a umask of "002" to user "user" (username changed
for this example) while logged-in through ftpd.
I used login class "class" (class name
On 12/22/2011 12:58 PM, Bastien Semene wrote:
Hi list,
I'm trying to apply a umask of "002" to user "user" (username changed
for this example) while logged-in through ftpd.
I used login class "class" (class name changed for this example)
I edited /e
Hi list,
I'm trying to apply a umask of "002" to user "user" (username changed
for this example) while logged-in through ftpd.
I used login class "class" (class name changed for this example)
I edited /etc/login.conf and set at the bottom (there's no ot
ys
750 and 640 (we set the umask to 022/133 for dir/file in pure-ftpd).
I try to trace the codes to figure it out. In order to find the problem,
I add some codes to print more information.
Here is the code for making a directory (FTP command MKD):
/* my codes for debugging */
fpri
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 03:16:56PM +0800, xinyou yan wrote:
> 1.
> In my system
> umask enter
> 022
>
> I want to know why i do the commander
>
> umask -S
> it show Improper mask
> not u=rwx,g=.
>
> 2. anybody who know how to listen the music
> On 12/11/10 17:16, xinyou yan wrote:
> 2. anybody who know how to listen the music like .ape or flac
Any player which use libavcodec.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsub
On 12/11/10 17:16, xinyou yan wrote:
1.
In my system
umask enter
022
I want to know why i do the commander
umask -S
it show Improper mask
not u=rwx,g=.
2. anybody who know how to listen the music like .ape or flac
flac will play with mplayer
1.
In my system
umask enter
022
I want to know why i do the commander
umask -S
it show Improper mask
not u=rwx,g=.
2. anybody who know how to listen the music like .ape or flac
thank you
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Hi Gary,
Parts of the filesystem are written by all users - /tmp and /var/tmp.
Users don't often write files there deliberately, but many programs run
by the user do.
With a umask of 002, one user can modify another user's file in these
locations. (The sticky bit only protects ag
eable by other users
unless it has g+w permissions. The way to guarantee this is to set
everyone's umask to 002 - but then they can write each other's files
anywhere else in the filesystem, because they're all in the same primary
group.
I just can't see a tidy solution.
Thank
www1 domain_users0 Mar 8 03:11 file1
other users can't edit it.
Solution 1
--
Change everyone's umask to 002. Unfortunately, these users are defined in
Active Directory and they're all in the same primary group - 002 is not secure
in this scenario.
Solution 2
--
>> On Tue, 14 Apr 2009 16:31:03 + (GMT),
>> Andy Hiscock said:
A> Ideally I would like to "create mask" to be set to generate -rw-rw.
A> Is there a way of working what the value should be?
I use this in smb.conf, which allows user/group write and world read:
force create mode =
Hi there.
Having problems with create mask in samba since changing my umask in
/etc/login.conf to 007.
I have created a share folder in /usr/homes with mod 770. Accessing and
writing/creating files/directories via ftp is as expected (-rw-rw) but when
copying a file via samba I get a real
On Sun, Jul 09, 2006 at 01:19:47PM -0700, jekillen wrote:
>
> Hello;
> I've not had to do this on a Unix system before. But now I have Apache
> running as nobody and
> have php scripts creating and writing to directories. The files it
> creates have the default mask
> rw-r-r and I want to change
Hello;
I've not had to do this on a Unix system before. But now I have Apache
running as nobody and
have php scripts creating and writing to directories. The files it
creates have the default mask
rw-r-r and I want to change it to rw-rw-- so I can remove the files and
dirs with group write perm
I want to be able to set some users' umask to 002 after they login via ssh.
Do I have to enable UseLogin to do this from login.conf? or is there another
method? The purpose for this is that I want to implement group-based
write privs without having to do ACLs which would be overkill for this
On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 16:50:56 +0100
koen de wijs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a question aboout the umask under FreeBSD. I couldn't find what
> it exactly is.
> It is something for setting files how you set the 'xrwxrwxrw'
> I found a file where you could
Hello,
I have a question aboout the umask under FreeBSD. I couldn't find what
it exactly is.
It is something for setting files how you set the 'xrwxrwxrw'
I found a file where you could chance it but don't knwo anymore what it
was.
I want to use this for my ftp-server wi
Hi, I put the following value to inetd.conf, killed inetd and restarted.
ftp stream tcp nowait root/usr/libexec/ftpd ftpd -l -u 007
When I ftped to the host and put files the mode of the files are still 644
whats the deal with this?
Evren
_
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 14 August 2003 22:46, Jez Hancock wrote:
> > Well, I don't know what to do anymore :)
> > Maybe setting an umask of 077 only for /usr/home (using fstab) would be a
> > good start ?
>
> The only gotcha there
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 08:25:15PM +0200, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Thursday 14 August 2003 20:19, Joshua Oreman wrote:
> > 066 will be *more* secure than 022.
>
> I know that :)
>
> > This is because a u
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 09:37:46PM +0200, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Thursday 14 August 2003 21:12, Jez Hancock wrote:
> > Some applications require a less strict umask to install files correctly
> > with the right p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 14 August 2003 21:12, Jez Hancock wrote:
> Some applications require a less strict umask to install files correctly
> with the right permissions - quite often you aren't warned about this
> either and it can be a headache fin
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 08:25:15PM +0200 or thereabouts, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Thursday 14 August 2003 20:19, Joshua Oreman wrote:
> > 066 will be *more* secure than 022.
>
> I know that :)
>
> > This is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thursday 14 August 2003 20:19, Joshua Oreman wrote:
> 066 will be *more* secure than 022.
I know that :)
> This is because a umask is deducted from the default permission bits of 666
> (or 777 for executables) on new files. So a umask of
On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 03:42:37PM +0200 or thereabouts, Antoine Jacoutot wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi !
>
> In my way to learn security under FreeBSD, I was wondering if a umask of "066"
> in login.conf was a good or bad ide
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi !
In my way to learn security under FreeBSD, I was wondering if a umask of "066"
in login.conf was a good or bad idea ?
Any thoughs ?
I mean at first, I can't seem to find why this could be wrong, but I'm sure
there's
Hi,
I believe in my adventures, this successfully worked by placing the
umask command in /etc/login.conf...
default:\
:copyright=/etc/COPYRIGHT:\
:welcome=/etc/motd:\
[snip]
:priority=0:\
:ignoretime@:\
:umask=002:
Rich.
| Rich Fox
| [EMAIL
** re-post **
Hi there,
What I'm trying to accomplish is
- to have a group of users called 'developers'
- read/write access to all files created by any member of that group by
each member of that group.
I believe in the past I've accomplished this via a umask of 002, but I
Hi there,
What I'm trying to accomplish is
- to have a group of users called 'developers'
- read/write access to all files created by any member of that
group
I believe in the past I've accomplished this via a umask of 002, but I
don't recall wh
n-X sessions. Maybe cobbled into a shell startup file or
even /etc/rc, but preferably in the "login" setup -- look for "umask" in
the login.conf manpage.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
From: Lowell Gilbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Bill Moran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would like to set my default permissions for X windows apps.
> I've set my umask for bash, which works great when I'm in a
> terminal, but it doesn't seem to ha
"Bill Moran" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I would like to set my default permissions for X windows apps.
> I've set my umask for bash, which works great when I'm in a
> terminal, but it doesn't seem to have any effect on X apps
> (such as the Mozill
I would like to set my default permissions for X windows apps.
I've set my umask for bash, which works great when I'm in a
terminal, but it doesn't seem to have any effect on X apps
(such as the Mozilla downloader, for example, or when I create
new files with Code Crusader)
Files
34 matches
Mail list logo
