Re: SECURITY PROBLEM: autofs [all versions]
Nathan Paul Simons wrote:
>
> Yeah, but a lot of our users like to use these machines remotely
> because they can rely on them not to be in Windows (unlike our other
> dual boot clients). We try to keep only stable releases running on
> our production net machines so that we don't have to hard boot them.
Hrm. Even stable isn't stable on my Athlon. :(
The same applied to my Alpha, but it didn't have a reset button anyway.
(Turns out to have been a hardware problem.)
> We figure that the usermount option (with appropriate nosuid,
> nodev, and noexec options) in /etc/fstab are good enough. Confusing to
> some users at first, but they learn quickly enough.
It's also superior to the autofs option (as you'd see if you follwed my
thread on the autofs list -- warning, it involves silly statements by
RMS, terse retorts by hpa, and my usual long-windedness). Luckily, the
/etc/fstab entry is sane. Autofs makes things easy, but it shouldn't
distribute security problems. Luckily, only the yp server needs to be
updated.
Christopher
Reply to: