Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Misleading comment in default configuration #2274

Closed
michaelrsweet opened this issue Mar 5, 2007 · 1 comment

Comments

@michaelrsweet
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Mar 5, 2007

Version: 1.2.8
CUPS.org User: twaugh.redhat

Continuing on from STR #2272, the following comment:

Only the owner or an administrator can cancel a job...

Order deny,allow Require user @owner @System

is misleading because there is no authentication performed on the user name, and 'cancel' has a -U option to supply a different user name than the current one.

How about adding "Note: this is unauthenticated and may be overridden"?

@michaelrsweet

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Mar 12, 2007

CUPS.org User: mike

We can argue semantics all we want, but at some level (even with password authentication) there is a certain level of trust about the incoming user ID. Rather than putting all comments in the conditional (and making the comments read like a legal agreement), I'd rather just leave things unchanged so that the spirit is preserved.

In short, the comment is not there as authoritative documentation, just as a hint about what the limit section is for.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
1 participant
You can’t perform that action at this time.