From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Bugreport on Ubuntu LTS: not ok - 2 Objects creation does not break ACLs with restrictive umask Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2012 12:44:39 -0400 Message-ID: <20120605164439.GA2694@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20120605075614.GE25809@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20120605140449.GA15640@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20120605141039.GB15640@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20120605142813.GA17238@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20120605150550.GA19843@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vpq9dpvnp.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Matthieu Moy , ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Beller , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jun 05 18:44:51 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SbwsA-00074b-UI for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 05 Jun 2012 18:44:47 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754449Ab2FEQom (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2012 12:44:42 -0400 Received: from 99-108-225-23.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.225.23]:43951 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754377Ab2FEQol (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2012 12:44:41 -0400 Received: (qmail 21518 invoked by uid 107); 5 Jun 2012 16:44:44 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Tue, 05 Jun 2012 12:44:44 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 05 Jun 2012 12:44:39 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vpq9dpvnp.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 09:31:54AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> setfacl -m m:rwx . > >> perl -MFcntl -e 'sysopen(X, "a", O_WRONLY|O_CREAT, 0444)' > >> umask 077 > >> perl -MFcntl -e 'sysopen(X, "b", O_WRONLY|O_CREAT, 0444)' > >> getfacl a b > [...] > > > > Reading the withdrawn posix 1003.1e and "man 5 acl", it seems pretty > > clear that if a default ACL is present, it should be used, and umask > > consulted only if it is not (so the umask should not be making a > > difference in this case). > > > > The reproduction recipe above shows the minimum required to trigger it; > > adding a more realistic default ACL (with actual entries for users) does > > not seem to make a difference. > > Thanks; so combining the above with your earlier patch to 1304 we > would have a good detection for SETFACL prerequisite? Yes, I think we can detect it reliably. I'd like to hear back from ecryptfs folks before making a final patch, though. It may be that there is some subtle reason for their behavior, and I want to make sure before we write it off as just buggy. -Peff