| 1 |
On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:19:19 -0500, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> > A normal user can pumount *WHAT THAT SAME USER* has pmounted. Now |
| 5 |
>> > try for a general solution. |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> The general solution is using something like udisks+polkit. That is a |
| 8 |
>> true general solution; otherwise you end up like the author of |
| 9 |
>> calibre, with a security mess on his hands: |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/calibre/+bug/885027 |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
>> If you dismiss the security implications of sudoing pmount, because |
| 14 |
>> you care only about *your* use cases, on *your* machine, by definition |
| 15 |
>> that is not a "general solution". |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> You should never need to sudo pmount, it is supposed to run as a normal |
| 18 |
> user. Walter is using sudo to run pumount, which is nothing like the |
| 19 |
> situation described in that bug. Even pmount avoids the situations |
| 20 |
> described in that bug because it is only capable of operating in /media. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
OK, noted. It is still not "a general solution", which is my main point. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Regards. |
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Canek Peláez Valdés |
| 27 |
Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación |
| 28 |
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México |
Archives