Full Disclosure mailing list archives
Re: Small Design Bug in Postfix - REMOTE
From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:11:24 -0500
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:52:33 CST, Adam N said:
No, the idea is that you are a user with no login access, only FTP. By doing this, you get shell access (with sane privileges, thankfully) when you're supposed to only have FTP.
And this is why, for at least 2 decades, it's been recommended that people doing the "FTP-only user" put the writeable directories for that user under ~ftp/$USER or some such, rather than ~$USER, and make the login shell for the user /bin/false, and other such things. For bonus points - if it's an FTP-only userid, why does the sysadmin not have e-mail for the userid *blocked*? After all, if they can't login, they can't *read* any mail that gets delivered to the system. Even if you fix the MTA to drop mail directly in $HOME/mbox, it's the rare FTP daemon that understands the locking needed to make this work - that's the primary reason why the POP protocol was invented.
Attachment:
_bin
Description:
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Current thread:
- Small Design Bug in Postfix - REMOTE kcope (Dec 13)
- Re: Small Design Bug in Postfix - REMOTE Fredrick Diggle (Dec 13)
- Re: Small Design Bug in Postfix - REMOTE Adam N (Dec 14)
- Re: Small Design Bug in Postfix - REMOTE Epic (Dec 14)
- Re: Small Design Bug in Postfix - REMOTE Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 14)
- Re: Small Design Bug in Postfix - REMOTE reepex (Dec 15)
- Re: Small Design Bug in Postfix - REMOTE Adam N (Dec 14)
- Re: Small Design Bug in Postfix - REMOTE Fredrick Diggle (Dec 13)
- Re: Small Design Bug in Postfix - REMOTE Jim Popovitch (Dec 13)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Small Design Bug in Postfix - REMOTE kcope (Dec 13)
- Re: Small Design Bug in Postfix - REMOTE Just1n T1mberlake (Dec 13)