Changes to named

[Douglas Furlong]

On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 12:39, Neal D. Becker wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 November 2003 09:20 pm, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> > On Nov  5, 2003, "Neal D. Becker" <nbecker at hns.com> wrote:
> > > I see in release notes that the permissions/ownerships of named files
> > > have changed.  Is it OK to install (clean), then restore my
> > > backed-up /var/lib/named and /etc/named.conf, or will I have to change
> > > ownerships/permissions?
> >
> > Err...  Release Notes anyone?
> >
> >      o The BIND nameserver has had its security tightened. The /var/named/
> >        directory is no longer owned by "named", but rather by "root". Slave
> >        zone files should now be stored in the new /var/named/slaves/
> >        directory, which is owned by "named". In addition, a new bind-chroot
> >        package makes it possible to run the named daemon in a chroot()
> > "jail" (located in /var/named/chroot/) for greater security.
> 
> Thanks, but I already read the release notes.  My question is, if I simply 
> restore my old named setup, overwriting the new permissions/ownerships with 
> the old ones, will named break?

Hi Alexandre.

I am guessing that this will probably prevent bind from starting.

However, as it is only an ownership change (it would appear), it should
be fairly easy to run chown -R on the required directory, affecting all
the files, and then again, one level lower on the slaves directory.

However it would appear, if you have slaves set up, you will also have
to alter the named.conf file so that the slaves files are placed in the
right directory.

Apologies in advance if I am completely off base on this topic (will be
doing this exact same thing in a day or two).

Doug