PHWinfo - Afficher un message - Does "nobody" is considered as group-member of others?

28/02/2008, 04h12

In our last episode,
<eca073b1-308a-436e-9f09-fa0d4c127eb7@j28g2000hsj.googlegroups.com>, the
lovely and talented Fro broadcast on comp.lang.php:

> Hi,

> the operating system (Unix) considers a php-server as a user with name
> "nobody". For example, if my php-script saves a file uploaded by a
> user, the owner of the file will be "nobody". I would like to know if
> "nobody" is considered as "group" or "others" (in terms of the "chmod"
> command)? In other words, is "chmod g+w dirname" sufficient to allow
> to "nobody" to write in the directory "dirname" or should I use "chmod
> o+w dirname"?

Usually 'nobody' is the least priviledged user (and is forbidden to login).

Thus, 'nobody' is an 'others' and should not be added to any other group.

--
Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> usenet@larseighner.com
Countdown: 327 days to go.

28/02/2008, 04h12	#2
Lars Eighner Messages: n/a Hébergeur:	Re: Does "nobody" is considered as group-member of others? In our last episode, <eca073b1-308a-436e-9f09-fa0d4c127eb7@j28g2000hsj.googlegroups.com>, the lovely and talented Fro broadcast on comp.lang.php: > Hi, > the operating system (Unix) considers a php-server as a user with name > "nobody". For example, if my php-script saves a file uploaded by a > user, the owner of the file will be "nobody". I would like to know if > "nobody" is considered as "group" or "others" (in terms of the "chmod" > command)? In other words, is "chmod g+w dirname" sufficient to allow > to "nobody" to write in the directory "dirname" or should I use "chmod > o+w dirname"? Usually 'nobody' is the least priviledged user (and is forbidden to login). Thus, 'nobody' is an 'others' and should not be added to any other group. -- Lars Eighner <http://larseighner.com/> usenet@larseighner.com Countdown: 327 days to go.