non-superuser chown(2)s considered harmful

[Chuck Karish]

In article <18786 at rpp386.cactus.org> jfh at rpp386.cactus.org
(John F Haugh II) writes:
>As for the annoying aspects of non-superuser chown(), such as
>mischevious users, that's an administrative problem.

It certainly is.  And non-superuser chown() destroys information 
that's vital for some administrative tasks.

That's why FIPS 151-1 mandates that the POSIX.1 _POSIX_CHOWN_RESTRICTED
option be supported.
-- 

	Chuck Karish		karish at mindcraft.com
	Mindcraft, Inc.		(415) 323-9000