Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe@cygwin.com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help@cygwin.com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
From: Andrew DeFaria <Andrew@DeFaria.com>
Subject:  Re: Permissions on .ssh/id_rsa
Date:  Thu, 18 Aug 2005 13:14:12 -0700
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <de2q6l$tr1$1@sea.gmane.org>
References:  <20050817201613.GA13524@SDF.LONESTAR.ORG> <4303DDEB.F45A3616@dessent.net>   <20050818134424.GA4219@SDF.LONESTAR.ORG> <de27im$sqh$1@sea.gmane.org>   <20050818184816.GA24529@SDF.LONESTAR.ORG> <de2mno$hkv$1@sea.gmane.org>  <Pine.GSO.4.61.0508181520260.3902@slinky.cs.nyu.edu> <de2o56$mdm$1@sea.gmane.org> <Pine.GSO.4.61.0508181548240.3902@slinky.cs.nyu.edu>
Mime-Version:  1.0
Content-Type:  text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding:  7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.5 (X11/20050711)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.61.0508181548240.3902@slinky.cs.nyu.edu>
X-IsSubscribed: yes

Igor Pechtchanski wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Aug 2005, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>
>> Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Aug 2005, Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>>>
>>>> To me it's just not natural to think of having ntsec without 
>>>> smbntsec. I forget what, if any, issues might have been involved. I 
>>>> can't think of a situation where you'd want Cygwin to honor ntsec 
>>>> but not honor smbntsec...
>>>
>>> When the SMB server doesn't reflect the permissions correctly,
>>
>> IMHO then that problem should be corrected.
>
> Not always possible.

It may require effort but surely it's not impossible. My point is that 
what you describe is a "broken" situation (i.e. it's not right) and I 
don't think the default should be set for situations where things are 
not correct as they should be, rather the default should be set for 
things being correct, i.e. as they should be and probably more often are...

>>> or when the owner user on the remote end isn't accessible via 
>>> Windows (e.g., mounting a DFS filesystem via SMB).
>>
>> How often does that happen?
>
> Don't know. It did happen to me, hence my use of nosmbntsec...

Exactly. IMHO smbntsec should be by default on and for those rarer cases 
where the environment is broken or the uncommon situations where 
something like mounting DFS through SMB is used then the user can 
consciously turn it off. IOW defaults should be chosen for the common 
case - not the uncommon one... But hey, that's just my opinion...
-- 
Would a fly without wings be called a walk?


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

