conf/145887: /usr/sbin/nologin should be in the default
phoffman at proper.com
Wed Apr 21 17:10:05 UTC 2010
The following reply was made to PR conf/145887; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Paul Hoffman <phoffman at proper.com>
To: Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-bugs-local at be-well.ilk.org>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit at FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: conf/145887: /usr/sbin/nologin should be in the default
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 09:39:54 -0700
At 12:31 PM -0400 4/21/10, Lowell Gilbert wrote:
>Paul Hoffman <phoffman at proper.com> writes:
>> If adduser offers it as a shell, it should be listed in /etc/shells; otherwise, this kind of error will nail admins.
>This is exactly what nologin is for. I wouldn't want to see all of the
>daemon-owning accounts starting to pass getusershell(3).
Sorry, I don't understand what you are saying. I thought the fact that /usr/sbin/nologin exists and is executable is so that it *could* be listed in /etc/shells safely. /usr/sbin/nologin is a log better than giving the user a shell that does not exist.
>> If it is decided not add /usr/sbin/nologin to /etc/shells, I propose that if someone tells adduser that that is a user's shell, adduser should have a warning that tells the admin that the shell they are adding is not in /etc/shells.
>It does have code for to disallow shells that aren't in /etc/shells or
>don't exist, but makes a special case for nologin (on the theory that
>that's the whole purpose of nologin). I suppose adding such a warning
>into the shell_exists() function would be okay, but I'm not sure what it
>The usual way to handle your issue is to adjust the procmail
>configuration, not the account's shell. I think that setting SHELL to
>something useful (presumably /bin/sh) in the user's .procmailrc (or I
>think you could even put this in /usr/local/etc/procmailrc) would do the
>> Look at the default /etc/shells
>> Add /usr/sbin/nologin to /etc/shells.
>How about changing adduser.sh along the lines of:
>> info "if you want procmail to work with nologin
> > shell, adjust .procmailrc accordingly"
Errr, we would need to be more explicit than that. I see nothing in the man pages for procmail or procmailrc that explains this well. And, in my case, it wasn't .procmailrc, but .vacation.
More information about the freebsd-bugs