X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:date:from:reply-to:message-id:to:subject :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=XQ2V3JKY/UT0gSAV g+CTi4IFBgi9PyTEb5y8YSKVY3++Ppcpzsqy1b2kTtUJI/qpK0Bls19RI7ZVUS8v O69xzjA6qjhR+WF3uePZct88IDdYSYHOJJaqBdd5TGiuG6E/A/J2bpFcQDpgteYQ SQ9upf1Mm95gXWybO+kyshij/UA= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:date:from:reply-to:message-id:to:subject :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=5t42bvsKt837Fu5rqiO+rt y49lE=; b=sdpTfhxzdTJnJufUCFMFUUbABP9nL/R2AqcxhZJ2ggwcdYbxueR6Tc sLYxChCF6MKHs9Q1a/YRDvL+xpfpAFeY9TcynvQN1vtZy01SpD/Q2NG/WJLNr7/b s/6z/KuqjJf0nh96U1UHXkFWH8ABgqXjBDFC8UokoFbWtWojOgHjc= Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: 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 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM,KAM_THEBAT,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2 X-HELO: smtp.ht-systems.ru Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 11:18:35 +0300 From: Andrey Repin Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <253902392.20141117111835@yandex.ru> To: Shaddy Baddah , cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: rebase db perms seem too restrictive In-Reply-To: <5469682A.6090501@shaddybaddah.name> References: <5469682A DOT 6090501 AT shaddybaddah DOT name> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Greetings, Shaddy Baddah! > I expect that there wasn't any explicit reasoning behind this, but > rebase creates a db with permissions that are too restrictive. To me > anyway, as I cannot see any danger in the db being readable by all. > This snippet describes it: > > $ whoami > sbaddah > $ od -c /etc/rebase.db.x86_64 > od: /etc/rebase.db.x86_64: Permission denied > $ ls -l /etc/rebase.db.x86_64 > -rw-rw---- 1 portapps None 86020 Nov 11 15:34 /etc/rebase.db.x86_64 > > I've attached an untested patch that would allow at least world readable > perms. It would be appreciated if it was applied :-) There's no reason or need for this file to be world readable. Even more, I think the fact that there's group access perms is a consequence of shallow translation of ACLs to POSIX permissions, given the group name and the fact you're unable to access the file. -- WBR, Andrey Repin (anrdaemon AT yandex DOT ru) 17.11.2014, <11:16> Sorry for my terrible english... -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple