Subject: Re: your mail

From: "Pomerance, Debbie" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 10:55:31 -0400

My problem is the following - a guest user in a chrooted environemnt
gets uids and gids rather than valid groups and owners from ls -la
output.
This did not occur with our prior version, 2.4(4).

I am now running -
1. 2.4 beta 18 upgraded from 2.4(4)
2. solaris 2.5.1 upgraded from 2.5
3. compiled with gcc 2721

My chroot for example is /usr4/app/home/papers/foo/./user/test

I have set up under /usr4/app/home/papers/foo the following -

/dev with udp; tcp; ticotsord; and zero (done with mknod)
   
/usr/lib with 
     ld.so.1     libdl.so.1    libmp.so.1
ld.so    libc.so.1     libintl.so.1  libw.so.1

I wasn't sure I needed both ld.so.1 and ld.so - but I saw a mention
in one of the docs (either faq, solaris 2.5.1 how to or
guestgroup how to; or an archived wu-ftpd mail message)
that this may be needed so I added it (it didn't help). 
(Should this be retained for other reasons?)

I also saw a mention that libmp.so.1 was needed with 2.5.1 so I
added it also (it did not help).
(Should this be retained for other reasons?)

I also saw a mention that the /usr/lib/nss* files were needed plus
the straddr. files (that did not help).
(Should this be retained for other reasons?)

/bin has ls    <-- I saw a mention that I might need a link from 
     /usr4/app/home/papers/foo/usr/ to ../bin which I put in...
     it did not help. (Should this be retained for other reasons?)

Added /etc/netconfig (that did not help).

I did a truss on /bin/ls and even added the /usr/platform files to
see if this would make a differnce - it did not. (Should this be
retained for other reasons?)

An ldd of the chrooted ls did not show any other shared library 
dependencies that I could see.

Does anyone have any suggestions - I'm basically at this point
pulling my hair out. ;<

I do want to mention that most of these attempts to fix the problem 
Occurred serially, not in parallel.  That is - I tried one, took it out,
tried the next, etc.  

My understanding is that there is no need to put the passwd and
group files into the chrooted area if you are only using guest and
real users and no anonymous users.  I certainly hope this is not
my problem.  Something else is going on and I can't FIGURE it out.

Debbie Pomerance

"Those who help others help themselves"
-------------------------------------------------------------
Deborah Pomerance         (202) 226-6255
mailto:[email-masked]
Unix System Administration
U.S. House of Representatives  /  House Information Resources

---

From: Gregory A Lundberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 11:08:08 -0400 (EDT)

On Mon, 24 Aug 1998, Pomerance, Debbie wrote:

> output.  This did not occur with our prior version, 2.4(4). 

> My understanding is that there is no need to put the passwd and group
> files into the chrooted area if you are only using guest and real users
> and no anonymous users.  I certainly hope this is not my problem. 
> Something else is going on and I can't FIGURE it out. 

Your undertanding is wrong.  You need to put passwd and group files there
so the ls command can use them.  I use abbreviated forms, showing only the
username, uid, and home directory .. and only include users and groups
which can actually appear in the chroot'd area. 

----

Gregory A Lundberg		Senior Partner, VRnet Company
1441 Elmdale Drive              [email-masked]
Kettering, OH 45409-1615 USA    1-800-809-2195

---

From: joe turbulencia <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1998 11:28:59 -0400 (EDT)

On Mon, 24 Aug 1998, Pomerance, Debbie wrote:

> <SNIP>

	i think you still need the 'passwd' and the 'group files
	in the ~ftp/etc directory.  otherwise, how would ls -l 
	evaluate the list for display?  for my site, i make all
	uid's and gid's the same, i.e., the users see 'ftpuser'
	regardless of what uid/gid is associated with the files.
	the 'passwd' & the 'group' files contain the various 
	uid/gid but they're all identified as 'ftpuser'.

	i hope this helps.