| delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
| X-Recipient: | archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com |
| X-SWARE-Spam-Status: | No, hits=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL |
| X-Spam-Check-By: | sourceware.org |
| MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
| In-Reply-To: | <20110318162340.GC10633@jethro.local.lan> |
| References: | <4D828E8E DOT 6020607 AT alice DOT it> <4D829D52 DOT 3040706 AT laposte DOT net> <20110318134646 DOT GA10633 AT jethro DOT local DOT lan> <AANLkTimo-39nG8_LjpY-vL5w65Pc8_t10gtc+TdQ0n7N AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <20110318162340 DOT GC10633 AT jethro DOT local DOT lan> |
| Date: | Fri, 18 Mar 2011 16:41:49 +0000 |
| Message-ID: | <AANLkTinMnCP3xSrH=SjEyJCgXyqgJSNubqPY4KzMi3Pd@mail.gmail.com> |
| Subject: | Re: Problems with the new base-files-4.0-5? |
| From: | Andy Koppe <andy DOT koppe AT gmail DOT com> |
| To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
| X-IsSubscribed: | yes |
| Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
| List-Id: | <cygwin.cygwin.com> |
| List-Unsubscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com> |
| List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
| List-Archive: | <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/> |
| List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
| List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs> |
| Sender: | cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com |
| Mail-Followup-To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
| Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
On 18 March 2011 16:23, David Sastre wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 02:17:14PM +0000, Andy Koppe wrote:
>> On 18 March 2011 13:46, David Sastre wrote:
>> > All [[, have been changed to a portable [ test.
>> > I've changed `test -a' for a portable `test -e', and the -a operator
>> > in the user's home ownership test to a chained test:
>> >
>> > elif [ ! -O "${HOME}" ] && [ "${HOME#/home/}" != "${HOME}" ]; then ...
>>
>> Even though that home ownership test was partly my idea, I think it
>> should simply be dropped, because it doesn't actually address the
>> security issue it was supposed to address and the warning is likely to
>> cause unnecessary alarm to users with unusual yet legitimate setups.
>
> IIRC, the point was that some apps expect $HOME to be owned by the
> user in order to operate correctly.
Originally at least it was supposed to address this:
http://www.cygwin.com/ml/cygwin-developers/2010-09/msg00007.html
The $HOME warning doesn't address this because for example a
maliciously prepared /home/$USER/.bash_profile would still get
sourced.
I can't remember other reasons.
Andy
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |