Re: sftp and directory group writable

"AK" == Alric Knebel <alric@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

AK> On 13 Dec 2007 22:02:19 -0500, Richard E. Silverman wrote:
>>>>> Silvermen is half-right and I would agree.
>>>> half right? that means they're half wrong then as well. What
>>>> part did they get wrong?
>>>>
>>>> Jason
>>> The writable bit set.
>> Could you be more specific about exactly what you imagine was
>> wrong in my post?

AK> Snippy?

Not really.

AK> File access restrictions as always, *only* if they are
AK> corresponding (assuming logindir=root) and SSH in step, sftp could
AK> give a rat's asshair (excepting PKI Auth).

AK> StrictModes is highly limited to control, this is the half
AK> bassakwards. ____________________ Alric Knebel

I'm sorry, but your English is mostly incomprehensible. Picking out the
only part I can understand, that sftp doesn't itself care about the modes,
this is exactly what I said:

sftp itself doesn't care about this bit explicitly...

--
Richard Silverman
res@xxxxxxxx

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Can scp be used to update a directory?
    ... fullsync uses sftp - i like it. ... win to linux syncing but i imagine it would work on any configuration as it ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: Random vs. Sequential
    ... > pros/cons with these types of file access at all? ... am assuming that "these types of file access" refers to the subject's ... Imagine a database of two million names. ... Would random or sequential access be better? ...
    (comp.lang.c)