Josip Rodin wrote: > No? Shit, I just changed Lintian to complain about it if not. :) Sorry, I was at first assuming ppp had an obvious reason for doing what it does. > I remember wondering about this myself when I did some work on the package. > I think I concluded that 750 is good because otherwise potentially sensitive > information (usernames and such) could be revealed to users not allowed to > run pppd, because they were in 755 files at the time. > > I took a short look now, and I see that the file permissions are stricter, > and can't quite find a valid reason for 750 other than maintaining backwards > compatibility. Backwards compatability? All I can think of is it leaking out in a pap-secrets~ file with wrong perms, which would be the admin's problem. ppp's postinst chowns all the files that need to be secret. -- see shy jo
Attachment:
pgp6encfvuZ7S.pgp
Description: PGP signature