[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Passive versus active translators

From: Neal H Walfield
Subject: Re: Passive versus active translators
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 09:44:37 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.18i

> > I do not see how this makes sense.  I see how it is logical, however, it
> > is misleading.  Consider the following:
> > 
> >     # settrans -cap ~/foo /hurd/isofs cdimage
> > 
> > The active translator will start, however, once it is stopped, the
> > filesystem will to be able to restart it.  In this scenario, guessing
> > from the `-ap', the user likely wants to make sure that the translator
> > is setup and correctly and then wants to forget about it.
> You're confusing the behavior of settrans with mount. If you do:

My argument is that this will work when setting the active translator,
however, it will not work with a passive translator.  Why?  Only because
of the current working directory -- this has nothing to do with parsing
the arguments to the translator.

> > Not true; make settrans suid root.
> This would open up a whole flood of security risks.

If the filesystem already has root privleges then no; you have the same
problems setting the passive translator.

> but by no means should the default ones be
> the same as the underlying node.

This is how a passive translator works.

Attachment: pgpDMvntKleNn.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]