Path: utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!purdue!decwrl!sun!pitstop!texsun!letni!void!rpp386!jfh
From: jfh@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: comp.bugs.sys5
Subject: Re: ulimit
Message-ID: <16042@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US>
Date: 24 Apr 89 04:53:29 GMT
References: <19516@genrad.UUCP> <1319@nusdhub.UUCP> <10075@smoke.BRL.MIL> <881@cetia4.UUCP> <100455@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US (John F. Haugh II)
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Dallas TX
Lines: 21

In article <100455@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> plocher@sun.COM (John Plocher) writes:
>In all this talk about ULIMIT don't forget that there is at least one known
>bug in the AT&T SVr[23] implementation:
>
>Kids, don't do this at home.

Hmmm.  Can't wait to get to work where I CAN try it out :-)

>	% ls -l /etc/passwd*
>	-rw-r--r--  1 root            0 Apr  3 10:44 /etc/passwd
>	-rw-r--r--  1 root          439 Apr  3 10:40 /etc/passwd.old
>	% su
>	password: xxxxxxx

How'd you do that?  In the absence of a password file entry for root
will su _really_ let you in?  [ The answer in SVr[12?] is NO ]
-- 
John F. Haugh II                        +-Quote of the Week:-------------------
VoiceNet: (214) 250-3311   Data: -6272  | "When everyone else complies
InterNet: jfh@rpp386.Dallas.TX.US       |  I will too ..."
UucpNet : <backbone>!killer!rpp386!jfh  +-------------------  -- Doug Davis  --