Gentoo Archives: gentoo-alt

From: Burcin Erocal <burcin@××××××.org>
To: gentoo-alt@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-alt] permission test
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 11:05:18
Message-Id: 20111020130522.04044117@carl.erocal.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-alt] permission test by Fabian Groffen
1 On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 20:45:50 +0200
2 Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > On 18-10-2011 20:34:12 +0200, Burcin Erocal wrote:
5 > > > > # Now we look for all world writable files.
6 > > > > + if [ "${QA_SKIP_WRITABLE-unset}" == unset ] ; then
7 > > > > local i
8 > > > > for i in $(find "${D}/" -type f -perm -2); do
9 > > >
10 > > > How would this work, if you changed the D into ED here? Checking
11 > > > files outside of our control is indeed not really useful.
12 > >
13 > > In that context, printing $D gives $PORTAGE_TMP/$CATEGORY/$P/image
14 > > in the prefix. Since these are the new files introduced by the
15 > > ebuild, I don't think we need to change that line. Note that this
16 > > is already in the portage sources and I didn't touch it. :)
17 >
18 > Ok, ED doesn't make a difference here. Can you explain why the host
19 > system is making world-writable files? What's its rationale to force
20 > that on you? Can't you really not just sanitise that (your umask?)
21
22 The message below wasn't distributed to gentoo-alt@, probably since
23 Alexander is not subscribed to the group.
24
25
26 Begin forwarded message:
27
28 Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 01:12:53 +0200
29 From: Alexander Dreyer <alexander.dreyer@×××××××××××××××.de>
30 To: Burcin Erocal <burcin@××××××.org>
31 Cc: gentoo-alt@l.g.o
32 Subject: Re: Fw: [gentoo-alt] permission test
33
34
35 Hi Burcin,
36 > can you provide more information about the file system that requires
37 > the change for the world writable check?
38 >
39 > I remember something about making files accessible to the group, but I
40 > don't think I can describe the reason sufficiently.
41 The file system itself is nothing special, but it is hosted by a
42 standalone file server which is exported to our Linux servers. But the
43 problem is not cause by a technical issue, but by a social one:
44
45 We have shared directories which can only be accessed by a certain
46 group of users. The access is managed by ACLs on the toplevel
47 directory, s.th. only permitted users gain access to the latter and its
48 child directories. Unfortunately the group of users is not a unix group
49 - this would not be possible because different projects gain various
50 combinations of people. So in order to allow collaboration, files have
51 to have world read/writable permissions.
52 (Anyway I do not have influence on this setup.)
53
54 You can change these permissions afterwards, but newly generated files
55 are world-writable in the first (this is enforced by the file server).
56 Of course only formally, because the access is restricted by the
57 toplevel ACLs.
58
59 Please note, that the problem only occurs for generated files, whose
60 permissions are never set (using chmod, install or untar sufficies to
61 fix the isuue). So I would consider this as a bug of those packages,
62 respectively.
63
64 BTW: I didn't try out, but FAT-based USB drives often enforce
65 world-writable mounts also.
66
67 It would already help me a lot, if the warning would not sleep for a
68 second.
69
70 My best,
71 Alexander

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-alt] permission test Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o>