On Thu, 2004-12-16 at 16:59, Nigel Metheringham wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-12-16 at 16:26 +0000, Ron McKeating wrote:
> > Not sure why anyone would want to bother to set up the sasl authd when
> > pam comes with fedora and works out of the box with minimal config.
> > There is no need for pam_exim any longer.
>
> You have changed permissions on /etc/shadow
> I would expect that to turn nasty on you at some point - ie selinux
> might decide to do something about that, and/or any upgrade may fix the
> permissions, locking out your mail service.
>
> Ideally someone would modify pam_exim (or better pam_unix so its:-
> * Vaguely acceptible
> * Can support checks from a specific user specified in the pam
> control file rather than a separate hard compiled in user.
>
> You have basically just re-implemented the old shadow password fixes -
> just use the file directly having modded the permissions.
>
> Nigel.
>
I agree Nigel, but it is simple and it works. Though as you say in the
ideal world pam_unix would behave in a more friendly manner.
Ron
> --
> [ Nigel Metheringham Nigel.Metheringham@??? ]
> [ - Comments in this message are my own and not ITO opinion/policy - ]
--
Ron McKeating
Senior IT Services Specialist
Internet Services and Software Solutions
Loughborough University
01509 222329
