This is the mail archive of the
cygwin
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [BUG 1.7] Read-only files are not.
On Dec 31 22:38, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 01, 2009 at 12:06:40AM +0000, Eric Blake wrote:
> >David Rothenberger <daveroth <at> acm.org> writes:
> >>It seems that read-only files in Cygwin 1.7 are not truly read-only.
> >>The sequence of steps below shows that "chmod 444 file1" does not make
> >>the file read-only in Cygwin 1.7, while it does in Cygwin 1.5. It may
> >>have something to do with the Read Only DOS attribute. This is set by
> >>Cygwin 1.5 but not by Cygwin 1.7. If I manually set it for Cygwin 1.7,
> >>the file does become read-only.
> >
> >Are you perchance running as an Administrator, and therefore you have
> >backup privileges? If so, then you have root-like power, and cygwin
> >exposes that by opening files with intent to backup even when the ACLs
> >would otherwise make the file unreadable. Therefore, even though none
> >of S_IRUSR, S_IRGRP, S_IROTH are set in the posixy st_mode bits,
> >access(file, R_OK) returns 0 and open() is able to exploit your
> >root-like powers to read that file.
> >
> >I thought Corinna mentioned this in the release notes.
>
> Ah, right. I remember when Corinna removed the "DOS" read-only bit.
The idea is that it doesn't make sense to utilize the DOS R/O attribute
for POSIX permissions if the file system supports real security, as NTFS
does.
> I am running with Administrator privileges so I guess this behavior
> makes sense.
Yep.
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/