Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Closed 8 years ago.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Improve this question
I'm using the folder /opt/ to install common software that would otherwise not be available as part of the package installer of the system and that should be available to many (developer) users in Linux (using Ubuntu at the moment):
/opt/dev/eigen/3.1.3
/opt/dev/boost/1.54
/opt/git/myproject1.git
/opt/git/myproject2.git
Putting the common software there would be the common practice right? how about permissions? I tend to chmod -R 777 /opt/dev but this is a very bad practice I guess. Suggestions on best practices in this area? probably something along the lines of adding a developers group and giving them all permissions or?
Note git is a special case but still all developers need access to it because pushing changes implies creating directory and files under that path with the developer credentials.
According to these sites:
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=35867
https://askubuntu.com/questions/169314/default-permissions-for-opt-directory
plus my experience, a correct permission to use is 755 for subdirectories in /opt. If your useris part of the root group, you could also set permissions to 775. You should be fine with this as long as there's nothing considerably sensitive in your /opt folder. If there is, then you might consider storing those in a separate subdirectory from /opt with even more limited permissions.
Related
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Closed 3 years ago.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Improve this question
In my Amazon Linux instance, I had to grant bin and libs tomcat folders the permission 777 via chmod 777 foldername. But now I need to revert them back. What are the correct permission commands to make them as they were?
Refer to "Security Considerations" chapter in Tomcat Documentation (the link is for Tomcat 9.0). Definitely not world-writable. Usually not world-readable (especially the conf and logs directories). The rest depends on your requirements.
E.g. it may be 750 for all directories except the conf one and 700 for conf.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Closed 5 years ago.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Improve this question
im using go-daddy to learn web hosting ...
so i had problem and i reset my account because i thought something change some settings in the server..
after i reset the account i still have the same problem that my web root DIR is in (ht-docs owned by root) which i cant edit ...
this is the effective root directory .. i dont know why its not (public_html)
i ve allready asked in godaddy before about this and figured out my self the root directory by searching html code in all files in my server
(grep -isr "html code" /*)
https://uk.godaddy.com/community/Managing-Web-Hosting/public-html/td-p/51705
note: im newbie in linux .. i've just purchased godaddy account to learn web hosting ..
Why do you want to edit stuf in the default htdocs dir while the document root is set to /public_html/www in your user dir, according to the control panel screenshot you provided?
Look for public_html/www in your user dir, it should be ~/public_html/www, which is a shortcut to /home/YOUR_USER/public_html/www
PS: be careful asyour last screenshot shows /home/YOUR_USER/public_html as the document root, while the control panel one as www on top of it (but it might just be to handle subdomains)
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Closed 5 years ago.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Improve this question
I can ssh to a digitalocean server using:
ssh root#1.1.1.1 (with the correct IP address)
however, after adding a user:
adduser git
...
is this information correct?
Y
...
I am not able to SSH with this new user
ssh git#1.1.1.1
Permission denied (publickey).
Why is my public key correct for root but not for git?
Update
If it matters, I am using digitalocean.
I know the problem, what your facing, you need to check the privilege of your key.
Change the user right permission. I do had an identifical problem, I can able to clone git via https not via ssh.
chmod utility will solve your issue:
This command will solve your problem.
chmod 777 <id_rsa_key(file)>
Some other frequently used examples are:
777 anyone can do anything (read, write, or execute)
755 you can do anything; others can only read and execute
711 you can do anything; others can only execute
644 you can read and write; others can only read
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
I have a Ubuntu 12.04 machine that I can only access using SSH. On this machine I have two users and I want to limit the access to certain files to one of these users.
Basically I want that user to be able to access only its home directory and nothing more. I know that by removing the rx permissions to other home directories for others is one option but I wanted to know if there is another way, a configuration file where I can tell that my user can only have access to that folder.
Thanks.
chrooted jail is the answer.
Like: https://www.howtoforge.com/chrooted-ssh-sftp-tutorial-debian-lenny
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Closed 6 years ago.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
This question does not appear to be about a specific programming problem, a software algorithm, or software tools primarily used by programmers. If you believe the question would be on-topic on another Stack Exchange site, you can leave a comment to explain where the question may be able to be answered.
Improve this question
I know it flies in the face of the very notion of a "secure shell," but I would like a way to run SSH that requires absolutely no authentication whatsoever. I have a collection of machines that run on a totally air gaped network. It's used for a hardware prototyping project, and for reasons beyond my understanding some of these machines occasionally start asking for a password regardless of the fact that they have all been cloned with the same SSH keys that work some times.
I'd really like to side step all the security issues that can prevent SSH from connecting to a machine. I've seen in other posts people strongly recommending against what I am trying to do; but I've wasted enough time trying to fight SSH's security features. Is there a flag I can use? A change to a config file? Another version of SSH I can install?
Any help would be appreciated.
It seems that you want a 'remote shell', so try rsh.