103 reputation
4
bio website rwec.co.uk
location
age
visits member for 2 years, 5 months
seen Jul 10 at 12:33

Sep
28
awarded  Editor
Sep
28
awarded  Excavator
Sep
28
revised Can subdomain.example.com set a cookie that can be read by example.com?
link to the right RFC(!); also remove some redundant URLs, just to push the edit over the min character limit
Sep
28
suggested suggested edit on Can subdomain.example.com set a cookie that can be read by example.com?
Sep
12
comment Do any Unix/Linux FTP daemons allow users to be “jailed” without using chroot?
Wow, I'd forgotten just how venerable FTP is. Not only is that RFC nearly 28 years old, but there had already been 42 RFCs on the subject in the 14 years before that! To the point, it explicitly mentions handling of all sorts of incompatible file systems; the tendency of non-Unix servers to emulate a Unix path structure is a later cultural phenomenon. RFC 3659 proposes a [standard virtual file system] based on this practice, but isn't an accepted standard. So, historically, I guess a fully virtualised file system in an FTP daemon would not have been an obvious design.
Sep
12
comment Do any Unix/Linux FTP daemons allow users to be “jailed” without using chroot?
@lVlint67 Fair point. I'm not asking for opinions on "best" implementation, just if there is a design other than chroot, but I guess I am hoping for a specific implementation too. I am also interested in the abstract question, though: is FTP necessarily bound to file system operations, so that what I'm looking for is unreasonable, or is it just that the FTPD implementations I've found were all based on the same (arguably flawed) design? I'll leave it to you and others to decide if that's enough justification to leave it open.
Sep
12
asked Do any Unix/Linux FTP daemons allow users to be “jailed” without using chroot?
Sep
12
awarded  Supporter
Jun
13
awarded  Informed