pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: PCP Updates: pmlogger AF_UNIX socket for normal users; qa version ch

To: Dave Brolley <brolley@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: PCP Updates: pmlogger AF_UNIX socket for normal users; qa version check bump
From: fche@xxxxxxxxxx (Frank Ch. Eigler)
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 11:26:02 -0500
Cc: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <5318966A.2080600@xxxxxxxxxx> (Dave Brolley's message of "Thu, 06 Mar 2014 10:38:18 -0500")
References: <53075D46.6090807@xxxxxxxxxx> <1734063835.17483667.1393481715436.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <53175AAC.5050706@xxxxxxxxxx> <y0ma9d4e93m.fsf@xxxxxxxx> <5318966A.2080600@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux)
brolley wrote:

> [...]
> I suggest teaching it something similar to what is allowed for pmcd,
> if needed. i.e.
>
> allow users userlist : operations ;
> disallow users userlist : operations ;
> allow groups grouplist : operations ;
> disallow groups grouplist : operations ;

The reason we can't have exactly that is because we don't have
user/group databases/authentication in effect for the pmlc-pmlogger
connection.  (I don't think we really want to go there either.)

> I agree with Nathan that same-uid and same-gid should always be
> allowed full access.

This is not obviously appropriate.  GID's can be shared amongst many
people, and we definitely don't want to hard-code that kind of trust.
The same-UID one is arguable.  A person may want to prevent accidental
runtime modification of his logger, even by his own future processes.


- FChE

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>