From: "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: "CHIGOT, CLEMENT" <clement.chigot@atos.net>,
"git@vger.kernel.org" <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-compat-util: work around for access(X_OK) under root
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 01:16:18 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190424011617.GG6316@genre.crustytoothpaste.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqsgu843yv.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1495 bytes --]
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 09:55:04AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> writes:
>
> > What POSIX says on this is the following:
> >
> > If any access permissions are checked, each shall be checked
> > individually, as described in XBD File Access Permissions, except that
> > where that description refers to execute permission for a process with
> > appropriate privileges, an implementation may indicate success for
> > X_OK even if execute permission is not granted to any user.
>
> Do I take this "not granted to any user" as "no +x bit is set for
> owner, group or other", and "a process with appropriate privileges"
> as "running as root"?
Yes. The language of the former is designed to allow ACLs or other
mechanisms, and "appropriate privileges" is the POSIX term for "root
permissions". The latter is also designed to allow implementations
leeway to implement an alternate mechanism.
Sorry for not explaining that up front; I'm so used to POSIX-speak by
now that it doesn't seem strange to me.
> The latter half feels iffy, if the system is still allowed to fail
> execution by "a process with appropriate privileges", leading to
> inconsistent answer from access(2) and behaviour by execv(2). But
> at least that explains what was observed.
Yeah, I don't love that POSIX makes this exception, but it is what it
is.
--
brian m. carlson: Houston, Texas, US
OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 868 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-24 1:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-23 8:38 [PATCH] git-compat-util: work around for access(X_OK) under root CHIGOT, CLEMENT
2019-04-23 10:11 ` Duy Nguyen
2019-04-23 10:32 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-04-23 11:31 ` CHIGOT, CLEMENT
2019-04-23 23:55 ` brian m. carlson
2019-04-24 0:55 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-04-24 1:16 ` brian m. carlson [this message]
2019-04-24 0:48 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-04-24 7:54 ` CHIGOT, CLEMENT
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190424011617.GG6316@genre.crustytoothpaste.net \
--to=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
--cc=clement.chigot@atos.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).