Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 3 Feb 2006 15:08:32 +0100 (MET) | From | Jan Engelhardt <> | Subject | Re: CD writing in future Linux (stirring up a hornets' nest) (was: Rationale for RLIMIT_MEMLOCK?) |
| |
>> >2. find out the current state of affairs, >> >> I am currently able to properly write all sorts of CD-R/RW and DVD±R/RW, >> DVD-DL with no problems using >> cdrecord -dev=/dev/hdb >> it _currently_ works, no matter how ugly or not this is from either Jörg's >> or any other developer's POV - therefore it's fine from the end-user's POV. > >How did you manage to burn a dual layer disc? I have been completely >unsuccessful at doing this at all. :( >
You have to add -driver=mmc_dvdplusr , because the Dual Layer discs are not yet in the ProDVD database as it seems.
>> I'm fine (=I agree) with the general possibility of having it setuid, >> though. > >Provided it doesn't allow burning files the real-user shouldn't be able to >access... But since cdrecord is commonly suid-root, I presume this has long >been taken into consideration. > Security-critical environments like data centers either have a Windows NT-style machine providing <enter whacky burning software here>, or they 've got a specialized machine that is marked "use for cd burning - note security implications". Usually there is no problem with that as in that case, you should remove your ISO you copied over for writing after writing.
>> SUSE currently does it in A Nice Way: setfacl'ing the devices to include >> read access for currently logged-in users. (Well, if someone logs on tty1 >> after you, you're screwed anyway - he could have just ejected the cd when >> he's physically at the box.) > >Aren't user-groups per-session anyway? Why not simply have the login program >apply a 'localusers' group to all local sessions and set device permissions >for that group?
userwhat? You mean supplemental groups as printed by id(1)? I find them ugly, because it's a real hassle to manage it with files.
In the past, NGROUPS_MAX also was 32, being more of a limit than today.
>To add to the security, perhaps there is a way to remove the >'localusers' permissions from all backgrounded processes (screen, etc) when >the user logs out? >
Jan Engelhardt -- | |