From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Il1G6-0006OS-Os for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:52:19 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.1/8.14.0) with SMTP id l9PBopXk032452; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:50:51 GMT Received: from out1.smtp.messagingengine.com (out1.smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.1/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l9PBjp5Z026204 for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:45:52 GMT Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.internal [10.202.2.41]) by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBBB9353A4 for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 07:45:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from heartbeat2.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.161]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 07:45:50 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: d59VFgkmX1nm07wmBxZbvQkC7VEIplNmuV9G9mt2HBrC 1193312750 Received: from [192.168.31.10] (cpe-24-167-121-156.satx.res.rr.com [24.167.121.156]) by www.fastmail.fm (Postfix) with ESMTP id 820D024AA0 for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 07:45:50 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] pam limits From: Albert Hopkins To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <47207f82.08b6660a.545e.ffffcb22@mx.google.com> References: <47207f82.08b6660a.545e.ffffcb22@mx.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: A Myth Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 06:45:49 -0500 Message-Id: <1193312749.27662.34.camel@blackwidow.nbk> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 610f268c-172d-4b68-b0e3-4d1f5bd8e046 X-Archives-Hash: 171c4f2d5f60458f79d46ba6783d2ca6 On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 14:35 +0300, Daniel Iliev wrote: > Hi, ppl > > I have the habit of imposing some limitations over all users via > /etc/security/limits.conf. For example I used to limit the number of > concurrent processes one can execute to prevent the system from simple > misuses like fork bombs by putting a limit (nproc) for group "users" > and all other common groups ("games" etc.) > > Now that the behaviour of "useradd -m xyz" has changed from putting the > newuser in group "users" ("xyz:users") to putting the user in a group > with same name ("xyz:xyz") I would appreciate any advice on getting the > old behavior back or any workaround to achieve the same goal - all > users should be limited by default at creation time. Oh do they do that now? That was that nasty Red Hat extension. Nevertheless, override the default behavior: # useradd -m -g users xyz -- Albert W. Hopkins -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list