1 |
On Sun, Jan 19, 2020 at 2:27 PM Michael Orlitzky <mjo@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> On 1/19/20 2:02 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> >> If you're sharing /home, you also have to be sharing user accounts, |
6 |
> >> unless you want everyone to be assigned a random set of files. |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> > I imagine that most people setting up something like this would only |
9 |
> > be sharing high-value UIDs (>1000 in our case). There is no need for |
10 |
> > postfix on your Gentoo box and postfix on your Debian box to have the |
11 |
> > same UID. You wouldn't be sshing from postfix on the one to postfix |
12 |
> > on the other and expecting to have the same home directory contents. |
13 |
> > |
14 |
> |
15 |
> You can't do that. If you're going to mount files from one system onto |
16 |
> another system, using only an integer <--> username mapping as your |
17 |
> access control mechanism, then you'd better be damn sure that those |
18 |
> integers and usernames match on all systems. Otherwise I might wind up |
19 |
> sharing /home/mjo to rich0 because the "mjo" and "rich0" groups both |
20 |
> have gid 1000 locally. |
21 |
|
22 |
Obviously the UIDs associated with the shared /home need to be |
23 |
identical. Simplest solution is to sync anything > 1000 in |
24 |
/etc/passwd, and then not allow UIDs below 1000 in /home. A cron job |
25 |
could easily handle both, and of course regular users can't go |
26 |
creating stuff with the wrong UID anyway. |
27 |
|
28 |
> We've talked this to death. Barring any new evidence, /home still seems |
29 |
> like the best place for these, and I don't want to put them in the wrong |
30 |
> spot (forcing users to migrate) just to appease a QA warning from before |
31 |
> GLEP81 was a thing. |
32 |
|
33 |
Well, great, then by all means ask QA for a policy exception. Not my |
34 |
place to yell at you if you don't, but don't be surprised if somebody |
35 |
else does... |
36 |
|
37 |
-- |
38 |
Rich |