Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from fieldses.org ([174.143.236.118]:34886 "EHLO fieldses.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751014AbaGKUUp (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jul 2014 16:20:45 -0400 Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 16:20:44 -0400 To: Trond Myklebust Cc: Frank Filz , Linux NFS Mailing List , Linux Kernel mailing list Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Fix permission checking by NFS client for open-create with mode 000 Message-ID: <20140711202044.GD11931@fieldses.org> References: <1404942892-18323-1-git-send-email-ffilzlnx@mindspring.com> <033801cf9bc7$0d7ee190$287ca4b0$@mindspring.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: From: "J. Bruce Fields" Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 07:12:09PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote: > Oops. Sorry, the correct sub-sub-sub-sub-....paragraph is this one: > > Permission to execute a file. > > Servers SHOULD allow a user the ability to read the data of the > file when only the ACE4_EXECUTE access mask bit is allowed. > This is because there is no way to execute a file without > reading the contents. Though a server may treat ACE4_EXECUTE > and ACE4_READ_DATA bits identically when deciding to permit a > READ operation, it SHOULD still allow the two bits to be set > independently in ACLs, and MUST distinguish between them when > replying to ACCESS operations. In particular, servers SHOULD > NOT silently turn on one of the two bits when the other is set, > as that would make it impossible for the client to correctly > enforce the distinction between read and execute permissions. > > > > To me that translates as saying that the server SHOULD accept an > > OPEN(SHARE_ACCESS_READ|SHARE_ACCESS_WRITE) request in the above > > situation. > > Same conclusion, though.... Are we sure that's not just a spec bug? Allowing OPEN(BOTH) on a -wx file seems like a pretty weird result. --b.