From: felicity@kluge.net  Wed Aug 28 10:46:13 2002
Return-Path: <felicity@kluge.net>
Delivered-To: yyyy@localhost.netnoteinc.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by phobos.labs.netnoteinc.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B23AB4415D
	for <jm@localhost>; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 05:45:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from phobos [127.0.0.1]
	by localhost with IMAP (fetchmail-5.9.0)
	for jm@localhost (single-drop); Wed, 28 Aug 2002 10:45:41 +0100 (IST)
Received: from eclectic.kluge.net
    (IDENT:8D4+93loqH1uP9+nnpXx+6aPzB2y7pYQ@eclectic.kluge.net [66.92.69.221])
    by dogma.slashnull.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7S1aCZ06126 for
    <jm@jmason.org>; Wed, 28 Aug 2002 02:36:12 +0100
Received: (from felicity@localhost) by eclectic.kluge.net (8.11.6/8.11.6)
    id g7S1aMk07018; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 21:36:22 -0400
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 21:36:22 -0400
From: Theo Van Dinter <felicity@kluge.net>
To: Justin Mason <yyyy@example.com>
Cc: mark@mlucas.net, spamassassin-talk@example.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: FAQ: taint warnings from SA in /etc/procmailrc
Message-Id: <20020828013622.GD30677@kluge.net>
References: <20020827224738.GA30677@kluge.net>
    <33052.194.125.220.138.1030490064.squirrel@jmason.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
    protocol="application/pgp-signature";
    boundary="wLAMOaPNJ0fu1fTG"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <33052.194.125.220.138.1030490064.squirrel@example.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
X-GPG-Keyserver: http://wwwkeys.pgp.net
X-GPG-Keynumber: 0xE580B363
X-GPG-Fingerprint: 75B1 F6D0 8368 38E7 A4C5  F6C2 02E3 9051 E580 B363
X-Pyzor: Reported 0 times.
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-11.8 required=7.0
	tests=IN_REP_TO,MULTIPART_SIGNED,PGP_SIGNATURE,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,
	      REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,USER_AGENT
	version=2.40-cvs
X-Spam-Level: 


--wLAMOaPNJ0fu1fTG
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 12:14:24AM +0100, Justin Mason wrote:
> actually, I think procmail supports this directly. use DROPPRIVS=3Dyes
> at the top of the /etc/procmailrc.

Hey, look at that!

       DROPPRIVS   If  set  to	`yes'  procmail  will drop all privileges
		   it might have had (suid or sgid).  This is only
		   useful if you want to guarantee that the bottom half
		   of  the /etc/procmailrc file is executed on behalf
		   of the recipient.

Of course, removing setuid/gid bits on programs that don't need it is
always a good idea.  A general rule of system administration: don't give
out permissions unless you absolutely need to.   ;)

--=20
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"The cardinal rule at our school is simple. No shooting at teachers. If
 you have to shoot a gun, shoot it at a student or an administrator."
                 - "Word Smart II", from Princeton Review Pub.

--wLAMOaPNJ0fu1fTG
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE9bCkWAuOQUeWAs2MRAr+iAJ9cVLx61vWsC5KFDLYv9/T7FaZmxACgzUpC
f235rrVr6cI8LvPC+IeIss0=
=BsCM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--wLAMOaPNJ0fu1fTG--

