Reputation
Top tag
Next privilege 200 Rep.
See reduced ads
Badges
1 10
Impact
~15k people reached

  • 0 posts edited
  • 0 helpful flags
  • 6 votes cast
Sep
30
comment Postfix: holding emails outside the Hold Queue possible?
Good enough. Thanks!
Mar
7
comment Postfix: holding emails outside the Hold Queue possible?
I run some scripts on the messages in the hold queue. Messages with content that doesn't meet certain conditions are not to be sent out. I can't delete these messages to allow a sys admin to be later be able to intervene and reschedule their delivery. Now, to be able to distinguish between these messages and messages that could sit in the hold queue indefinitely for other reasons (not controlled by my scripts), I want to keep the former outside of the postfix hold queue. Otherwise, the admin will never know whether it's a postfix problem or a problem with my script.
Jan
3
comment Is it possible to restrict /tmp to 0770 permissions?
Yes, surely :-). I was thinking of upvoting a little bit later, as my mind was totally totally preoccupied with the problem. Here you go, my friend...
Jan
3
comment Is it possible to restrict /tmp to 0770 permissions?
Thanks. But can you also tell me how to undo the effect of the above? Basically, I want to be able to get back the original '.' character (denoting default SELinux context) in the output ofls -ld /tmp. After issuing your commands, I'm seeing a '+' character, and am not sure how to get it back.
Jan
3
comment Is it possible to restrict /tmp to 0770 permissions?
I read the chroot INFO page, not sure how I would go about making all those 1000s of binaries available under a new root, and that too for each separate user. Would appreciate any further pointers, if you have done this before. Tia,
Aug
29
comment How to route network traffic of a host via another host?
@DrGkill Is there anything else I need to do on A?
Aug
29
comment How to route network traffic of a host via another host?
Thanks quanta! The command was accepted successfully. But, when I now ping www.google.com, I get a From hostA (<ipaddrOfHostA>) icmp_seq=1 Destination Host Prohibited error, and 100% packet loss.
Aug
29
comment How to route network traffic of a host via another host?
Btw, DrGkill, I would greatly, GREATLY appreciate if you could also mention the other ways. And also, some book/resource where these concepts are covered in a practical way. I don't need Tannenbaum-like theory, rather concepts and actual Linux commands I can try out and learn would be helpful. Not sure, if the apparently dated [faqs.org/docs/linux_network/index.html](Linux Network Administrator's Guide) is still current and covers the recipe you gave above. Thanks much and God bless.
Aug
29
comment How to route network traffic of a host via another host?
On issuing the ip route add command, I got this error: Error: either "to" is duplicate, or "gw" is a garbage.
Jul
24
comment Linux tmpfs having no effect on performance!
@David Why should clearing the cache make startup faster, shouldn't startup be slower after a cache clearing...? because the disk has to be read again to populate the cache?
Jul
21
comment Linux tmpfs having no effect on performance!
@womble: Would greatly appreciate if you could list those options/cases where it's possible that tmpfs is failing to actually get used.
Feb
19
comment netcat -e: the GAPING_SECURITY_HOLE
That doesn't appear to be a very good argument because the security hole is by all means there even in the supposedly secure version of nc with that piece of code disabled. It thus gives a false sense of security to new users. A better strategy, IMO, would be to warn loud and clear in the man page that, hey, this program is very dangerous and, so, you may or may not want to give everybody access to it. (Or, something to that effect.)
Feb
19
comment netcat -e: the GAPING_SECURITY_HOLE
My executable is called nc; it came with Fedora12 (nc-1.84-21.fc12.i686), and does not have the -e option. Some distributions do but this one does not. And the 'justification' for this absence is covered in places like this one for example. My question is about the distributions that disable -e. As I argued above, even in such, so-called safe versions, you have the security hole anyway... so why not as well provide -e and make it a tad easier for the ethical hacker and the power user.
Dec
12
comment External USB HDD with Linux: usage tips?
Thanks, Chris! +1.
Nov
8
comment Securing NTP: which method to use?
No, the solution has to be NTP-based. It's not my product or company here that I can make such decisions. :-( But, thanks anyway for taking the time to write.