Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 16:33:00 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: Avoiding /etc/passwd and /etc/group scans
Message-ID: <20021022203300.GC6429@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
References: <3DB416E7 DOT 99E22851 AT ieee DOT org> <20021021162246 DOT GC15828 AT redhat DOT com> <20021022162432 DOT GF514 AT redhat DOT com> <3DB58CBD DOT 87B2BDD8 AT ieee DOT org> <20021022181947 DOT GA4729 AT redhat DOT com> <3DB5A076 DOT ABAFF076 AT ieee DOT org> <20021022191217 DOT GD4828 AT redhat DOT com> <3DB5AB53 DOT B434ED90 AT ieee DOT org> <20021022202004 DOT GA6995 AT redhat DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20021022202004.GA6995@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i

On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 04:20:04PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 03:47:31PM -0400, Pierre A. Humblet wrote:
>>Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>> The same person who chided me was indicating that setup.exe was somehow
>>> creating files that were incorrect or that cygwin was unable to execute
>>> files with .exe extensions.  I don't really understand what's going on.
>>
>>The "incorrect" may be from the absent -d 
>>I don't understand the non executable .ex, although an "ls -l" that
>>does not show the x is understandable.
>
>I guess I have to look at the code.  A file with a .exe extension is
>supposed to be executable by default.  It should even show up as -x.

Nope.  I was wrong.  If ntsec is active then it has complete control.

I sort of like this since it is like linux but since setup.exe won't
properly extract files with the executable bit turned on, I guess I
have to override this.

I guess I have to do the same thing for '#!' magic too, right?  Ugh.
There goes a big ntsec advantage.

cgf