Re: Bug#3063: sudo executable not readable?
On Tue, 21 May 1996, joost witteveen wrote:
> > Thinking about it one more time I wonder why the program should have mode
> > 4755, except that this is what the packaging guidelines suggest. Personally
> > I'd like to have noone read it (call me paranoid :-)). Any opinions?
> I think it's because we prefere giving paranoid people a REAL
> sence of security, as opposed to a fake one: makeing them unreadeble
> doens't offer any security as far as I know (certainly not for
> freely copyable debian packages).
> I guess for paranoid people, appart from seeing a doctor, it's best
> to know what parts can be compromised, rather than letting him think
> it's safe, and then later he'll have a BIG shock when he sees he was
> wrong in thinking he was safe (this is a really bad experience for
> paranoid people, I guess).
I was going to say (as another paranoid person wrt security) that the
guidelines were probably thinking about letting people run file on setuid
commands when they mandatted 4755...
But you've got a really good point. There's no point in making the binary
4711 when everyone can get the source.
Maybe these could be put in the guidelines as an explanation of the 4755?
Would cut down (a tidbit) on the number of debian-devel posts and make
paranoid people happier.
Hmm... I guess that means I'll have to find something else to be paranoid
about, security-wise. :-)