Mail Archives: cygwin-developers/2002/08/24/15:00:30
On Sat, Aug 24, 2002 at 10:34:31PM +0400, egor duda wrote:
>Hi!
>
>Saturday, 24 August, 2002 Pierre A. Humblet Pierre DOT Humblet AT ieee DOT org wrote:
>
>PAH> At 06:53 PM 8/24/2002 +0400, egor duda wrote:
>>>Hi!
>>>
>>>Are you talking about nt->unix access rights mapping here?
>
>PAH> Yes.
>
>>>What if in this case we set permissions like this:
>>>-abcxyzxyz user Everyone file_name
>>>
>PAH> I assume you are talking about mapping the nt ACL to unix
>PAH> Makes sense, group = other. However the way the code is written, it will
>PAH> interpret the ACL as -abcxyz--- because the Everyone ACL entry is
>PAH> used up for group. With the change I proposed (I will send a patch), it
>PAH> would be -abc---xyz, which would in fact be equivalent to -abcxyzxyz, as
>PAH> Everyone is no more a valid group in the unix sense, so there is nobody
>PAH> in Everyone !
>
>Ah, ok. Actually, this should be enough for standard logic for checking of
>access rights via access() or stat() to work. '-abc---xyz' may look a
>little strange for an eye of an untrained unixoid who is using cygwin,
>but it's probably ok. The main point of my concern is to maintain
>
>'File is accessible natively' iff 'File looks accessible from the
>point of view of posix APIs'
>
>as strictly, as we can.
Hmm. Interesting perspective when you read email all at once rather
than when it comes in (I've been away).
Two things come to mind when reading this thread:
1) Should we just be ignoring "Everyone" when we read /etc/group? Would
that have "fixed" things here?
2) Would it be feasible to either extend cygcheck to perform some sanity
checks on file accesses or to write another standalone utility that
does so?
Actually, now that I think of it, adding some additional logic to cygcheck
to accommodate frequently seen problems in the cygwin mailing list would
be a wonderful thing. This is a little more difficult than it may seem
at first since, these days, cygcheck is not a cygwin program.
However, it could be an interesting project for someone who is not currently
a cygwin internals guru. You could make a huge difference to the cygwin
community if you could add, say, checking for common problems when trying to
run "cron" or something.
>PAH> I am curious why it was decided to put the file in the Everyone group.
>
>:) It was purely by accident. I agree that this may be foolish, but
>this doesn't mean we shouldn't be foolproof against this.
I agree.
cgf
- Raw text -