/etc/at.allow is absent and alice appears in /etc/at.deny.
Which statement is appropriate?
If at.allow is absent, many implementations consult at.deny and reject listed users.
Detailed explanation
Incorrect. When allow is absent, the deny list is consulted.
Incorrect. When allow is absent, the deny list is consulted.
Correct. alice is listed in at.deny, so at access is denied.
Correct. alice is listed in at.deny, so at access is denied.
Incorrect. at.deny lists users to reject.
Incorrect. at.deny lists users to reject.
Incorrect. at uses at.allow and at.deny, not cron's files.
Incorrect. at uses at.allow and at.deny, not cron's files.
Try it yourself
An example you can run in a temporary verification environment.
printf '%s\n' 'at.allow: absent' 'at.deny: alice' 'alice: denied'Expected result
at.allow: absent
at.deny: alice
alice: deniedKey points
- Check allow first
- Deny when allow absent
- Separate from cron files
Notes
- Environment: 一般的なatアクセス制御規則の合成確認
- Command output formatting can vary slightly by distribution or tool version.
- Run the example in a temporary directory or process when possible.
Foundation review
Read the scope first
Check whether the command acts on the current shell, a new process, an existing process, or a file.
Verify the observable result
Use the supplied command and compare the output with the expected result.