Re: UPG and the default umask
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:14:28AM -0600, Aaron Toponce wrote:
> On 05/17/2010 10:02 AM, Harald Braumann wrote:
> > - you could have a UPG system but a mismatch of IDs -> wrong umask
>
> ID numbers, yes. ID names, no. If the user name maches the group name,
> IE: aaron = aaron, then the user matches the private group. If the match
> is not made, then umask 0022 should be in play.
from pam_umask's description of the usergroups option:
If the user is not root, and the user ID is equal to the group ID, *and*
the username is the same as primary group name, the umask group bits
are set to be the same as owner bits (examples: 022 -> 002, 077 ->
007).
So if there is a mismatch of *either*, name or ID, then pam_umasks
detects a non-UPG system, while it might very well be all UPG. Also,
just because Debian's adduser happens to give the same name to the
user as well as to his private group, this is not necessarily true in
all system. You could have group names that are prefixed with "grp",
or whatever, but still have a perfectly valid UPG system.
> > - you could have a non-UPG system but a user's name and ID happen to
> > match those of the group -> wrong umask
>
> If the username matches the group name, then you have a UPG system.
And on what assumptions do you base this conclusion?
> Unless you created a user called "devel" and put him in the "devel"
> group. Debian is not substitute for stupidity.
How is that stupid? Users and groups are completely seperate name
spaces, so why would I care in a non-UPG system?
harry
Reply to: