NNTP proxy(?) and BSD type groups.

NNTP proxy(?) and BSD type groups.

Post by Justin Clanc » Fri, 04 Jul 1997 04:00:00


Two problems for the knowledgable out there:

News across a firewall
We have a small Linux box acting as a firewall with two interfaces (one to
the 'net, the other on our LAN.  I would like to be able to use News on
Netscape across the firewall, BUT I don't want a local news server (I want
to use demon) and I can't run Netscape on the firewall.  We use Apache as
a proxy server, so FTP and HTTP are OK, but how canI do the same for

BSD-like groups
Linux seems to use the SysV type groups where one has to use newgrp to
change groups.  I need to have the same facility as BSD, where one is
automagically included in all the groups specified in the /etc/group file.

I apologise if these are simpleton's questions, but I am *really* busy at
the moment and people on this group have been very helpful in the past.

  Best regards,

PS.  In case you are wondering - I'm using pine on the firewall to post
this query - sometimes the old technology is the best!

Justin Clancy - Managing Director.
The Clan Partnership Ltd.

"Divide by banana error: Reload universe and reboot"


1. POLL: Do you use BSD group semantics + private groups + umask 002


        In general many people find working in groups on
System V machines a little difficult and error-prone --
to effectively change "hats" you have to execute newgrp
to obtain a new group id, you then have to change your
umask so that files you create are useable by others
in your group and occasionally (to fix up errors or when
getting files from elsewhere) you have to run chmod
to add permissions for others in your group.

An Alternative

        You can avoid the use of newgrp if you use BSD
semantics for the group ownership of files.  With
BSD semantics, the group ownership of a file is the same
group of the directory in which it is created.  You can
also avoid having to change your umask by always having
your umask permissive for groups (002) and having your
home files in a group with only you as the user.

The result is that changing "hats" can be accomplished
by merely changing directory.

I'd like to know how many admins out there already use
this sort of scheme, and whether you have found any
administrative problems with it.  (I am far more interested
in real problems experienced, not speculation about
what problems may arise)

As far as I can tell, the only cost (and a minor one at
that) is a larger group file (because you need one group
for each user)

Please mail me and tell me if you use the above scheme
or what you think of the idea.

I will summarize to this newsgroup. [ c.u.admin ]

[ If you're not using a BSD based Unix you may be able to
get BSD semantics with a option in "mount" or by setting
the gid bit for a directory (chmod g+s .) ]

[  Please do not concentrate too much on the umask given;
027 or 022 or 007 would also be somewhat useful, although "one
umask fits all" is an attractive idea) ]

[ I am posting this to c.u.programmer because one of the major
reasons to share files is cooperative software development ]

        -Matt Hannigan

2. Performance Slackware vs RedHat 1.2.13

3. nntp on BSD

4. Squid forms based authentication.

5. Serving text as nntp/smtp file mime.types

6. Announce: Simkin the embedded scripting language

7. Matrox Mystique ands X.

8. Incoming connections problems

9. BSD, BSD or BSD?

10. for lynnett: extremely comforting nntp groups - av dic - (1/1)

11. NNTP, pared GROUPS file, and help getting nn started

12. BSD, BSD or BSD?