user/group named

From: Mike's List (mikelist@sky.net)
Date: Fri Jun 14 2002 - 16:29:35 EDT

• Next message: raoul s: "offtopic size question"
• Previous message: Robert L. Harris: "DiskSuite+Jumpstart errors"
• Next in thread: Mike's List: "SUMMARY: user/group named"
• Reply: Mike's List: "SUMMARY: user/group named"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

I'm about to bring a DNS system online and wanted to get some feedback.

-- Most Solaris system I've seen, named just runs/owns by root.
-- Most Linux (ie. Redhat) I've seen, named runs/owns by named
   (user and group) --only /var/named and everything below owns
   by named (user and group).

My question is, does it matter if named is own by root or named? I can see
why Redhat/Linux is set so there's a user named and group named for another
layer of security, but how big of a deal if named is run/own by root? or is
this just "matter of preference"?

Thanks.

- Mike
_______________________________________________
sunmanagers mailing list
sunmanagers@sunmanagers.org
http://www.sunmanagers.org/mailman/listinfo/sunmanagers

• Next message: raoul s: "offtopic size question"
• Previous message: Robert L. Harris: "DiskSuite+Jumpstart errors"
• Next in thread: Mike's List: "SUMMARY: user/group named"
• Reply: Mike's List: "SUMMARY: user/group named"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Wed Apr 09 2008 - 23:24:27 EDT