This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 11. 4. 2015 11:59, Corinna Vinschen wrote: >> Out of curiosity, does the code somehow distinguish ACLs that don't >> have these default permissions (or have different permissions set for >> SYSTEM / Administrators)? > > I don't quite understand the question. > > For a start, I'd like to point out how POSIX ACLs are supposed to work. > http://linux.die.net/man/5/acl is a good start. This is our role model. I'm gonna read that. > The new code will compute the mask the same way as before, but it > skips the permissions of SYSTEM and Administrators while doing that. > That means, the POSIX group permission bits are not affected by > the Windows-typical permissions of SYSTEM and Administrators. > > Example: > > User rw- > Primary group r-- > Other user rw- > Other group r-- > SYSTEM rwx > Everyone --- > > The computed POSIX MASK/CLASS_OBJ value in Cygwin 1.7.35 is the sum > of all group and secondary user permissions > > rw- | r-- | rwx == rwx > > The new code ignores SYSTEM, thus the mask is > > rw- | r-- == rw- > > Does this explain it sufficiently? Yes, thank you. My question was about the case where SYSTEM or Administrator doesn't have the typical permissions. From this explanation, I assume that I won't be able to see any difference in the mask in that case, but it doesn't seem to be a bad thing. -- David Macek
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |