Default permissions

Grrr - webmail and unintended form-activation.

The second part of that is that the shared folder is per-user (e.g.
/home/brad and /shared/brad/, with /shared/brad mapped to
/home/brad/public).  This also solves the issue of Apache needing
access to user's home-dirs (where that's appropriate).

Brad

On 10/21/05, Bradley Shuttleworth <brad.shuttleworth at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> For my R0.02, sharing files is far better managed by having a "public"
> folder outside the home directory, and mapping it in (via symlinks,
> etc).  That accomplishes the same effect (being able to share files,
> etc.) without having to resort to having everything world-readable.
>
> That way its obvious to the user where the "public" files go, and also
> that other files _are_ hidden.
>
> Brad
>
> On 10/21/05, John Nilsson <john at milsson.nu> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2005-10-21 at 10:00 +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 02:35:54PM -0700, George Farris wrote:
> > > > Having /home permissions be other than 0700 is a no no IMHO.  It always
> > > > has been on UNIX systems.
> > >
> > > No, it really hasn't! The ability for users to conveniently share files
> > > has always come first in Unix.
> >
> > Even so, the implications of having to explicitly allow access to stuff
> > you want to share is far less than the implications of unknowingly
> > sharing stuff you thought was safe...
> >
> > Regards,
> > John
> >
> >
> > --
> > ubuntu-devel mailing list
> > ubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> > http://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
> >
>
>
> --
> Brad Shuttleworth
> email: brad.shuttleworth at gmail.com
> blog: http://rabbithole.co.za/
>


--
Brad Shuttleworth
email: brad.shuttleworth at gmail.com
blog: http://rabbithole.co.za/