Hide Forgot
Description of problem: - The useradd(8) manpage states: --- 8< --- -u, --uid UID The numerical value of the user’s ID. This value must be unique, unless the -o option is used. The value must be non-negative. The default is to use the smallest ID value greater than 999 and greater than every other user. Values between 0 and 999 are typically reserved for system accounts. --- >8 --- - The actual default lower bound is: $ grep UID /etc/login.defs UID_MIN 500 - There actually always is a user with a larger UID by default: $ grep nfsnobody /etc/passwd nfsnobody:!!:4294967294:4294967294:Anonymous NFS User:/var/lib/nfs:/sbin/nologin Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): All shadow-utils RHEL5 packages How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1. Install a new system, or temporarily remove UIDs over 500 from # getent passwd 2. Create a new user: $ adduser foo 3. Check its UID Actual results: # getent passwd foo foo:...:500:...:...:/home/foo:/bin/bash Additional info: - This documentation looks like a specification - The shadow-utils behaviour should reasonably predictible as it is not unusual to implement security policies based on expectations on the UID (notably through pam_succeed_if.so)
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion in the current release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Because the affected component is not scheduled to be updated in the current release, Red Hat is unfortunately unable to address this request at this time. Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to propose this request, if appropriate and relevant, in the next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Created attachment 528197 [details] fix Pierre, could you please take a quick look at proposed "fix". I have changed few statements that refer to UID_MIN/UID_MAX/GID_MIN/GID_MAX. thnx.
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2012-0244.html