RFS is by far better that NFS!

[Karl Denninger]

In article <957 at ursa-major.SPDCC.COM> dyer at ursa-major.spdcc.COM (Steve Dyer) writes:
>In article <1989Dec19.195321.3431 at ddsw1.MCS.COM> karl at mcs.MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) writes:
>>
>>The problem we have is that we have a physically secure network.  Thus, we
>>WANT root to really be root -- on all filesystems.  Allowing this lets us
>>put one big Exabyte tape drive on the network and back up everything.  It
>>allows us many other conveniences as well.
>>With 386/ix NFS, none of this is possible -- unless I want to write a tape
>>server.  Ugh.
>
>Can't you patch the value of the variable "nobody" in your ISC kernel?

Yep.  That was pointed out by a benevolent person; I have done it and it
works -- about 95%.

SUID root programs still can't get to files however.  "smail3" is a prime
example.  It can't find the paths database if I locate it on the server.
Says it can't open the file, but doesn't return an error code (yikes!).

I haven't looked at this closely yet, but will have to do so.....

>Most Sun-derived NFS ports use the value of the integer variable "nobody"
>as the UID to map root to.  If you use "adb" or something you hack
>yourself to change the value of "nobody" to 0, you should be all set.

Yep.

>I'm not an ISC user, but this is almost always consistent across most
>implementations.

It is, but undocumented.  No problem, that's what hacking is all about!

--
Karl Denninger (karl at ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Public Access Data Line: [+1 708 566-8911], Voice: [+1 708 566-8910]
Macro Computer Solutions, Inc.		"Quality Solutions at a Fair Price"