|
Focus on Sun
allowing ordinary users to open privileged ports Sep 02 2004 02:40PM randy calma repasa (rrepasa ekonek com) (6 replies) Re: allowing ordinary users to open privileged ports Sep 10 2004 11:40PM Brian Hatch (bri ifokr org) Re: allowing ordinary users to open privileged ports Sep 04 2004 02:08PM Casper Dik (casper holland sun com) (1 replies) Re: allowing ordinary users to open privileged ports Sep 06 2004 06:07AM Kapetanakis Giannis (bilias edu physics uoc gr) (1 replies) Re: allowing ordinary users to open privileged ports Sep 06 2004 12:02PM Casper Dik (casper holland sun com) RE: allowing ordinary users to open privileged ports Sep 04 2004 02:07PM Alan W. Rateliff, II (lists rateliff net) Re: allowing ordinary users to open privileged ports Sep 04 2004 02:05PM Jason (security brvenik com) |
|
Privacy Statement |
1024. The request from the client doesn't make a lot of sense - perhaps it
could be explained to the client that it is more secure to run the Java
application on a non-privileged port. Or the application could be recoded
to do something like what the Apache web server does - start as root to
bind to the port, then switch to a non-root user. I have no idea if that is
possible for a Java app.
Or, maybe sudo could be used to allow a regular user to start the
application - in this case though, the application would still be running
as root.
-David Meissner
At 10:40 PM 9/2/2004 +0800, randy calma repasa wrote:
>Hello all,
>
> Has anyone in the list successfully tried allowing ordinary
>users to open privileged (< 1024) ports? We have a solaris 8 on sparc
>machine running an (java) application that normally uses ports > 1024;
>however a client requested the application to use privileged ports
>instead.
>
> This resulted in the application failing to start as the port
>that the application was trying to bind to was < 1024. I've looked for
>methods/workarounds to allow this but have so far come up empty.
>
> I would appreciate any experiences or links that the list could
>point me to.
>
> Thank you very much and best regards.
>
>Randy
[ reply ]