Re: Lesson learned / file permissions

From: Olle Eriksson (pt00oer_at_student.bth.se)
Date: 10/20/04

  • Next message: Olle Eriksson: "Re: Lesson learned / file permissions" 
    To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 15:19:15 +0200

    On Wednesday 20 October 2004 13.03, Alexis Huxley wrote:
    > On 2004-10-20, Olle Eriksson <pt00oer@student.bth.se> wrote:
    > > I think it was the fact that /home lost all world-permissions that
    > > caused all the problems. Would you agree?
    >
    > The problem is the '.*' above expanding to '..' and therefore affecting
    > the parent directory.

    Ahh.. I didn't think of that. I actually only did that because
    chmod /home/username/* didn't seem to affect a lot of the files in the
    hidden directories. I should have been more careful. :) Thanks for
    explaining.

    > > Secondly, by calling chmod with sudo, all the files owned by root
    > > that I as a user needed to see were now invisible. But they don't
    > > seem to be so many so I am wondering if that had any influence.
    >
    > You should not have any files owned by root under a normal user's home
    > directory (or under /home as the '.*' error above would mean).

    I had a more careful look this time and found that all the 777 files were
    acutally symlinks, so I guess I shouldn't worry. And the few files owned
    by root were not any important files, just temporary emacs files from
    using sudo etc.

    > > Should I simply leave the .* files in my home directory alone? :) I
    > > acually found some that had 777 permissions which I didn't like. All
    > > my documents are 750 or less and the umask is set to 027. Is that ok
    > > for security?
    >
    > You might be interested in 'fadfixperms' which reads instructions for
    > how to set permissions on a hierachy of files and enforces them. I do
    > this on a daily basis to make sure that what I intend to keep private
    > is kept private despite a umask of 022 which I need in a cooperative
    > work environment. Google for it.

    I'll have a look at that.

    Regards
    Olle 

    -- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
  • Next message: Olle Eriksson: "Re: Lesson learned / file permissions"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: su
      ... check the parent directory or to that matter check your home directory ... owner to see if you own it. ... sam owens wrote: ... > What I'd like to know is how I can save files not being root in X and I ...
      (alt.os.linux.redhat)
    • Re: functions in private directories
      ... Only functions in the parent directory can call functions in a private ... I looked for follow-ups to my original post of a week ago. ...
      (comp.soft-sys.matlab)
    • HOWTO mass fix FileOwnerShip in case of problem
      ... your collegues, enters sth like this as root, ... "chown someuser.users .*" and expects to change dot started files, ... current directory and parent directory. ...
      (linux.redhat)
    • Re: Why did my stylesheet stop working?
      ... If before your pages were under gestalt.johnjsal.com and now they are under www.johnjsal.com/gestalt, then the directory structure was not the same as it is now because before your pages were in the root and now they are one directory down. ... If you previously navigated to http://gestalt.johnjsal.com/x.y and that's the address that continued to appear in the browser's address field after the page loaded, then that means that there *was* no parent directory: the root doesn't have a parent directory. ... At best, the web server would have treated the root as its own parent--but that *isn't* the case now: with your pages one level down, the parent directory is the root directory, which is now *different* from the directory containing the pages. ...
      (alt.html)