| To: | "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: pcp updates: lberk/marko merges, build+docs updates |
| From: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 5 Jan 2016 18:24:15 -0500 (EST) |
| Cc: | pcp developers <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Delivered-to: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20160105225138.GA5695@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <805278639.3777112.1451891182627.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <780203978.3777208.1451891272970.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <y0mio37n8i3.fsf@xxxxxxxx> <404092777.4770722.1452032875540.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <20160105225138.GA5695@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Thread-index: | oBgWPCt1aOzWeuxh4FVVsJ5L29nXFQ== |
| Thread-topic: | pcp updates: lberk/marko merges, build+docs updates |
----- Original Message ----- > > > [...] it has perfectly safe & legimitate [sic] uses, [...] > > > > I've not seen a realistic case for elevating remote privileges > > and circumventing the pmcd/DSO authentication model in this way, > > just for webapps. [...] > > Here are two realistic cases, not of "circumvention" but of normal First case does not seem very realistic, but hmmm, *shrug*, maybe. The second case is just the pmdaproc case rehashed (i.e. an opt-in pmdapapi -A option would be a far better approach, localising that privilege elevation). cheers. -- Nathan |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [Bug 1270176] Python PMAPI pmSetOptionHostList no workie, bugzilla |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | pcp updates: softnet fix, docs tweak, Nathan Scott |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: pcp updates: lberk/marko merges, build+docs updates, Frank Ch. Eigler |
| Next by Thread: | Re: pcp updates: lberk/marko merges, build+docs updates, Frank Ch. Eigler |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |