HP3000-L Archives

April 1998, Week 4

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Lee Gunter <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lee Gunter <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 22 Apr 1998 11:20:21 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (39 lines)
To expand on Greg's response, you could eliminate group password
maintenance by assigning GL capability to both the user and to all the
access rights in the group (i.e., "...; access=(r,w,a,l,s,x:GL) ).  These
permissions would then be available to only those users homed to that group
and with GL capability in their capability lists (and, of course, AM users
in that account and all SM users).

Lee Gunter
mailto:[log in to unmask]

==========================================================
The opinions expressed, here, are mine and mine alone, and do not
necessarily reflect those of my employer.




From: [log in to unmask] on 04/22/98 10:13 AM

Please respond to [log in to unmask]


To:   [log in to unmask]
cc:    (bcc: Lee Gunter/BCBSO/TBG)
Subject:  Re: CHGROUP COMMAND.




I am surprised that no one mentioned VeSoft's facility for disallowing
certain commands.
You would also want to do something for chdir, as well.
While I like the UDC approach, except for what it does to HELP CHGROUP,
we password certain sensitive groups that the authorized user is home to
(so that they don't need to specify the password, thus granting that
user transparent access). As for the UDC, if you provide no commands for
unauthorized users, they get the prompt back. No message, no error, just
the prompt.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2