Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site tekcrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!tektronix!tekcrl!news
From: news@tekcrl.UUCP (Network News daemon)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Symbolic user names and RFS
Message-ID: <532@tekcrl.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 17-Feb-86 16:42:30 EST
Article-I.D.: tekcrl.532
Posted: Mon Feb 17 16:42:30 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 19-Feb-86 20:13:37 EST
References: <674@oliveb.UUCP> <1246@ubc-ean.UUCP> <759@im4u.UUCP>
Reply-To: tektronix!toddb (Todd Brunhoff)
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 26
Keywords: RFS chown

In article <759@im4u.UUCP> smoot@im4u.UUCP (Mitchell) writes:
>It seems that it is *imperative* for security reasons to have the same
>UID/GID ==> username mapping on any systems which share filesystems.
> ...
>I might add that we do have a number of departments sharing the same
>ethernet that do not participate in the uniform naming system we use.

Certainly, having a common uid base solves some problems like
portability of tar files, etc.  But it is not a panacea.  We at CRL, in
fact do insist on identical uid/username pairs on our two vaxes, but
even if I tried to insist on it for the 75 workstations we have here,
I'd be silly to expect 100% compliance.  And apparently Mr. Mitchell has the
same sort of success with the departments not under his control.

This problem (plus the fact that I abhor administrative tasks like
changing user id numbers at the rate of one-a-day) is why I wrote RFS
to do the mapping for you based on existing and easily available
information:  .rhosts for each user.

Certainly, what I did in RFS was not completely satisfactory, otherwise there
would be no complaints.  I think the best solution suggestion has come
from Jerry Aguirre @ Olivetti where he suggests that the server map the
user id for system calls like chown, chgrp, etc., because it has the
/etc/passwd files for both machines.  I would also add that
a real good idea would be to do the same for stat, lstat.  The problem
(with RFS) would then disappear.