I did not find any clues when 'googling' and could not find any search
options on the archives.
So, your answer does really not help.
If you can help me with some reference, then it is highly appreciated.
I would like to understand the rationaly. Not why 'it is just like it is'.
No, why. What is the reasoning behind it.
I speak Dutch, English, some Japanese and C. So, I can write something
to patch it up in C.
But if I do not understand the rationale behind it, what is the value of
the writing in any language?
If I do not understand the context, that you think I should implicitly
understand, what should I do?
I can send in a patch if you like.
Kind regards,
Stephan
On 01-05-15 23:42, Damien Miller wrote:
On Fri, 1 May 2015, Stephan Leemburg wrote:
Hello,
Is there any security reason why the last component of a chroot path
is required to be owned by root and not by the user that is chroot-ed
into that path?
This has been discussed on this mailing list several times in the past.
You should check the archives.
_______________________________________________
openssh-unix-dev mailing list
openssh-unix-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev
