Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site watdcsu.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!watnot!watdcsu!herbie
From: herbie@watdcsu.UUCP (Herb Chong - DCS)
Newsgroups: net.unix
Subject: Re: Alternate Shells
Message-ID: <1618@watdcsu.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 19-Aug-85 10:38:33 EDT
Article-I.D.: watdcsu.1618
Posted: Mon Aug 19 10:38:33 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 20-Aug-85 21:44:28 EDT
References: <10672@Glacier.ARPA> <575@bu-cs.UUCP> <615@ucsfcgl.UUCP>
Reply-To: herbie@watdcsu.UUCP (Herb Chong - DCS)
Organization: U of Waterloo
Lines: 29
Summary: 

In article <615@ucsfcgl.UUCP> arnold@ucsfcgl.UUCP (Ken Arnold) writes:
>I helped make this decision -- it was because people who left their
>terminals unattended for a few minutes (to relieve themselves, say)
>would find themselves with a strange shell the next time they logged
>on.  This kind of prank became such a pain (besides being virtually
>unfixable without finding a super-user, a species of (alleged) person
>not always available when you have an assigment due the next morning)
>that we decided to turn off chsh to non-normal shells except for root.

but making changes to the list of "valid" shells inaccessible except 
by modification of source brings up several points:
1)	binary only sites require a super user's intervention 
	whenever a user wants to change shells (not often) to others
	that may be available (vsh, ksh, tcsh come to mind)
2)	the biggest computer security problem is still people.
	i never leave my terminal unattended.  either someone i
	trust watches it, i lock it up, or i lock the door, depending
	on where i am.
3)	a valid list that is compiled in or read from a file provides
	a lot more flexibility anyway

Herb Chong...

I'm user-friendly -- I don't byte, I nybble....

UUCP:  {decvax|utzoo|ihnp4|allegra|clyde}!watmath!water!watdcsu!herbie
CSNET: herbie%watdcsu@waterloo.csnet
ARPA:  herbie%watdcsu%waterloo.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa
NETNORTH, BITNET, EARN: herbie@watdcs, herbie@watdcsu