X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2006 21:55:37 +0100 From: Corinna Vinschen To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: No effect of SE_BACKUP_NAME privilege on cygwin? Message-ID: <20060301205536.GA11552@calimero.vinschen.de> Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com References: <4405F5F9 DOT 8010708 AT t-online DOT de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4405F5F9.8010708@t-online.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On Mar 1 20:28, Christian Franke wrote: > Enabling SE_BACKUP_NAME has no effect for cygwin programs. You're expecting that you can use Windows functions in a POSIX application without disturbing the way Cygwin works. That's a bit dangerous. A Cygwin application's main thread is not running under the process token, but under a derived impersonation token. This is true for every thread in Cygwin. So, instead of using OpenProcessToken, you should be able to accomplish what you want by calling OpenThreadToken. However, I'm wondering if a Cygwin application should always try by itself to request the SE_BACKUP_NAME privilege. It would simplify file access for all privileged processes. Hmm. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Red Hat -- 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/