X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:mime-version:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding:date:from:to:subject:message-id; q=
	dns; s=default; b=XFI+0DV8w55dAzD8Y4MAKk7fsz7v4juQlSXPasBOLalwno
	HHUOEbGGSjFMDlScq+sSYZzHdfVbe28ppKFJEjSRQMZ4u5s3TF7a7nD45JZuCXaV
	eJ0THULQ0jdvwTXJMqYU1JDJhiClxfde0Ynp4FVP3wFeucOowahQAyr73DWyo=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:mime-version:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding:date:from:to:subject:message-id; s=
	default; bh=GMLOKtyvlFnu8PQkTNQDp+vvYuM=; b=HHT5PHq4BacfFpYaGaXS
	dM2RLFIHxm/TEjWxQPLJFfUjaFHfc/UEEcoCtT9XkWt8JesKoTaepm55lAbzxZ4N
	WGywSRoBnezGzOXZHZcE/przTWkCrIeWUsKslMvHVX/+df8Jjd30WeYJ8GS1rJnl
	cEf/SwWhtesZgQBJFQeOgY0=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.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
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=-0.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=513, authenticated, Valid, 545
X-HELO:	lb1-smtp-cloud2.xs4all.net
MIME-Version:	1.0
Date:	Sun, 20 Dec 2015 18:52:57 +0100
From:	Houder <houder AT xs4all DOT nl>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	setfacl(2.4.0.14): recalculation of the ACL mask entry
Message-ID:	<4e359179a04344745b43991e66398a6e@xs4all.nl>
X-Sender:	houder AT xs4all DOT nl (zCwsf9Gz2h/qaQ7xIA+2lA==)
User-Agent:	XS4ALL Webmail
X-IsSubscribed:	yes

Hi Corinna,

According to acl(5), the mask entry (as reported by getacl) is 
"optional" if the
acl contains no 'u:uid:perm' and/or 'g:gid:perm' entries (ace's) ... 
Ahem.

VALID ACLs (from acl(5) )

      A valid ACL contains exactly one entry with each of the 
ACL_USER_OBJ,
      ACL_GROUP_OBJ, and ACL_OTHER tag types. Entries with ACL_USER and
      ACL_GROUP tag types may appear zero or more times in an ACL. An ACL
      that contains entries of ACL_USER or ACL_GROUP tag types must 
contain
      exactly one entry of the ACL_MASK tag type. If an ACL contains no
      entries of ACL_USER or ACL_GROUP tag types, the ACL_MASK entry is
      optional.

However, setfacl(1) and your setfacl also note, that the default 
behaviour of
setfacl is to recalculate the mask entry ...

%% setfacl -h
Usage: setfacl [-n] {-f ACL_FILE | -s acl_entries} FILE...
        setfacl [-n] {[-bk]|[-x acl_entries] [-m acl_entries]} FILE...
[snip]

-n, --no-mask
   Valid in conjunction with -m.  Do not recalculate the effective rights
   mask. The default behavior of setfacl is to recalculate the ACL mask 
entry,
   unless a mask entry was explicitly given.  The mask entry is set to 
the
   union of all permissions of the owning group, and all named user and 
group
   entries.  (These are exactly the entries affected by the mask entry).
[snip]

I decided to experiment ... See below. (the mask entry is not 
recalculated, it
appears).

Regards,
Henri

-----
%% uname -a
CYGWIN_NT-6.1-WOW Seven 2.4.0(0.292/5/3) 2015-12-20 13:18 i686 Cygwin
%% id
uid=1000(Henri) gid=513(None) 
groups=513(None),1007(HelpLibraryUpdaters),559(Performance Log 
Users),545(Users),11(Authenticated Users)

%% touch foo.txt
%% getfacl foo.txt
# file: foo.txt
# owner: Henri
# group: None
user::rw-
group::r--
other:r--

%% setfacl -m g:Replicator:rw- foo.txt
%% getfacl foo.txt
# file: foo.txt
# owner: Henri
# group: None
user::rw-
group::r--
group:Replicator:rw-
mask:rw-
other:r--

%% setfacl -x g:Replicator: foo.txt # and remove it again
%% getfacl foo.txt
# file: foo.txt
# owner: Henri
# group: None
user::rw-
group::r--
mask:rw- <==== mask is now optional according to acl(5), but ...
other:r--

%% ls -l foo.txt
-rw-rw-r-- 1 Henri None 0 Dec 20 17:59 foo.txt <==== OK, but ...
%%

Ok, the permissions correspond with the mask (see acl(5) ), but 
according to setfacl(1),
the mask should have been recalculated ...

According to acl(5):
ACL ENTRIES

ACL_MASK  The ACL_MASK entry denotes the maximum access
           rights that can be granted by entries of type
           ACL_USER, ACL_GROUP_OBJ, or ACL_GROUP.

Recalculation by me in this case, yields: mask:r--

(perhaps, as suggested by Sam, I should retire ... it is all getting 
beyond
  simple is it not?)

  ### switch from user Henri to user Test
(can another user with the same gid, modify the file?)

%% pwd
/home/Test
%% cd ../Henri
%% id
uid=1006(Test) gid=513(None) 
groups=513(None),545(Users),11(Authenticated Users)
%% ls -l foo.txt
-rw-rw-r-- 1 Henri None 0 Dec 20 17:59 foo.txt
%% echo Corinna > foo.txt
bash: foo.txt: Permission denied <==== OK, but the permissions as shown, 
are
                                        misleading, are they not?
%%

=====

--
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

- Raw text -