samba - Nov 2002 - "attrib +R myowndir" fails to write-protect my own dir

A trivial case:

executing the following DOS command from the prompt line on a Win2K SP3:

   %windir%\system32\attrib.exe +R H:\dir

can't set the R(eadonly) flag on my home dirs (2.2.7):

   drwxrwsr-x  4  me  users  4096 Nov 27 17:59 .
   drwxr-sr-x  2  me  users  4096 Nov 27 17:59 dir
   -r--r--r--  1  me  users     0 Nov 27 17:59 empty.txt
   drwxr-sr-x  2  me  users  4096 Nov 27 17:27 profile

The relevant settings are:

      create mask = 664
      directory mask = 0775
   [homes]
      valid users = %S
      read only = No
      inherit permissions = No
      directory security mask = 0777
      browseable = No

The packets exchanged very quickly between my WS and the server:

Win2K SP3 Client                  SuSE 8.1/samba 2.2.7 server
================================= ===============================Tr2 Rq
Q_PATH_INFO, Path:         Tr2 Rs Q_PATH_INFO
Tr2 Rq FIND_FIRST2, Pattern: \dir Tr2 Rs FIND_FIRST2, Files: dir
NT Create AndX Req, Path: \dir    NT Create AndX Resp, FID: 0x2f70
Tr2 Rq SET_FILE_INFO, FID: 0x2f70 Tr2 Rs SET_FILE_INFO
Close Request, FID 0x270          Close Response
                                  nfs>netbios-ssn[ACK]...

The log at level 3 shows no error:

smbd/process.c:process_smb(878) Transaction 35 of length 79 
smbd/process.c:switch_message(685) switch message SMBtrans2(pid 10017
smbd/trans2.c:call_trans2qfilepathinfo(1702)call_trans2qfilepathinfo: 
            TRANSACT2_QPATHINFO: level = 1004 
lib/util.c:unix_clean_name(387)   unix_clean_name [] 
lib/util.c:unix_clean_name(387)   unix_clean_name [.] 
smbd/trans2.c:call_trans2qfilepathinfo(1734)
            call_trans2qfilepathinfo . level=1004 call=5 total_data=0 
smbd/process.c:process_smb(878)   Transaction 36 of length 98 
smbd/process.c:switch_message(685)switch message SMBtrans2(pid 10017
smbd/trans2.c:call_trans2findfirst(900)   call_trans2findfirst:
            dirtype = 22, maxentries = 1366, close_after_first=1, 
            close_if_end = 1 requires_resume_key = 1 level = 260, 
            max_data_bytes = 16384 
lib/util.c:unix_clean_name(387)   unix_clean_name [/dir] 
lib/util.c:unix_clean_name(387)   unix_clean_name [dir] 
lib/util.c:unix_clean_name(387)   unix_clean_name [./] 
smbd/dir.c:dptr_create(488)   creating new dirptr 256 for path ./,
            expect_close = 1 
smbd/process.c:process_smb(878)   Transaction 37 of length 101 
smbd/process.c:switch_message(685)switch message SMBntcreateX(p.10017
lib/util.c:unix_clean_name(387)   unix_clean_name [/dir] 
smbd/dosmode.c:unix_mode(111)   unix_mode(dir) returning 0664
lib/util.c:unix_clean_name(387)   unix_clean_name [dir] 
smbd/process.c:process_smb(878)   Transaction 38 of length 120 
smbd/process.c:switch_message(685)switch message SMBtrans2 (pid 10017
lib/util.c:unix_clean_name(387)   unix_clean_name [dir] 
lib/util.c:unix_clean_name(387)   unix_clean_name [dir] 
smbd/trans2.c:call_trans2setfilepathinfo(2418)
          call_trans2setfilepathinfo(8) dir info_level=1004 totdata=40 
smbd/dosmode.c:unix_mode(111)   unix_mode(dir) returning 0755 
smbd/process.c:process_smb(878)   Transaction 39 of length 45 
smbd/process.c:switch_message(685)switch message SMBclose (pid 10017) 
smbd/reply.c:reply_close(3148)   close directory fnum=12144 

but the directory remains writeable.

At compile time there were only some warnings about implicit
declarations of functions, "__fork" in "smbwrapper/smbw.c"
and many
more with the pattern "smbw_some-syscall" in
"smbwrapper/wrapped.c"
but the comment in the file says not to try to get rid of them.

The only other suspect diagnostic was for functions "smbc_telldir"
and "smbc_lseekdir" in "libsmb/libsmbclient.c", lines 2279
and 2320:
cast to pointer from integer of different size, here the lines:

   2279  return (off_t)fe->dir_next;
and
   2320  struct smbc_dirent *dirent = (struct smbc_dirent *)offset;

Setting R-flag on a regular file works, but setting H(idden) or 
A(rchive) flag doesn't.

If "inherit permissions" is changed to "Yes" then not even a
regular
file can be write-protected but then H and A flags can be set and
cleared.

I suspect the same problem causes "magic" folder links to lose their
magic, i.e. the R-flag.

Can anyone help?

Yours truly
Dragan


_____________________________________________________________
Get 25MB, POP3, Spam Filtering with LYCOS MAIL PLUS for $19.95/year.
http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus&ref=lmtplus

On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 07:23:30PM +0100, Dragan Krnic
wrote:
> A trivial case:
> 
> executing the following DOS command from the prompt line on a Win2K SP3:
> 
>    %windir%\system32\attrib.exe +R H:\dir
> 
> can't set the R(eadonly) flag on my home dirs (2.2.7):
> 
>    drwxrwsr-x  4  me  users  4096 Nov 27 17:59 .
>    drwxr-sr-x  2  me  users  4096 Nov 27 17:59 dir
>    -r--r--r--  1  me  users     0 Nov 27 17:59 empty.txt
>    drwxr-sr-x  2  me  users  4096 Nov 27 17:27 profile
This is by design. From the source code :

  if (IS_DOS_DIR(dosmode)) {
    /* We never make directories read only for the owner as under DOS a user
       can always create a file in a read-only directory. */

Jeremy.

True, but was his desire to prevent deletion of the directory, like in
DOS?

C:\>mkdir test
C:\>attrib +r test
C:\>rmdir test
Access is denied.
C:\>attrib -r test
C:\>rmdir test

This works on windows mapped shares, but not on samba.

~ Daniel

-----Original Message-----
From: jra@dp.samba.org [mailto:jra@dp.samba.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 3:54 PM
To: Dragan Krnic
Cc: samba@lists.samba.org; dkrnic@t-online.de
Subject: Re: [Samba] "attrib +R myowndir" fails to write-protect my
own
dir


On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 07:23:30PM +0100, Dragan Krnic
wrote:
> A trivial case:
> 
> executing the following DOS command from the prompt line on a Win2K
SP3:
> 
>    %windir%\system32\attrib.exe +R H:\dir
> 
> can't set the R(eadonly) flag on my home dirs (2.2.7):
> 
>    drwxrwsr-x  4  me  users  4096 Nov 27 17:59 .
>    drwxr-sr-x  2  me  users  4096 Nov 27 17:59 dir
>    -r--r--r--  1  me  users     0 Nov 27 17:59 empty.txt
>    drwxr-sr-x  2  me  users  4096 Nov 27 17:27 profile
This is by design. From the source code :

  if (IS_DOS_DIR(dosmode)) {
    /* We never make directories read only for the owner as under DOS a
user
       can always create a file in a read-only directory. */

Jeremy.
-- 
To unsubscribe from this list go to the following URL and read the
instructions:  http://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/samba

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

This message is the property of Time Inc. or its affiliates. It may be
legally privileged and/or confidential and is intended only for the use
of the addressee(s). No addressee should forward, print, copy, or
otherwise reproduce this message in any manner that would allow it to be
viewed by any individual not originally listed as a recipient. If the
reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any unauthorized disclosure, dissemination, distribution,
copying or the taking of any action in reliance on the information
herein is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication
in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete this message.
Thank you.

I'm so glad there are kind souls at this time of night. Wait, it might
be day at your place. Good day!

I don't see a contradiction in setting Readonly flag on one's own
directories and then creating files in them anyways. It's very much 
like any overruling root privilege. It's just a flag, Jeremy, it's 
not our saviour's gospel. Bill knows we don't march over dead bodies 
and he's taking unfair advantage of it.

I propose a new smb.conf feature for 3.0:

   [homes & especially profiles]
      overrule readonly dirs = Yes/No

Default is "No", but in exceptional cases, like on almost every samba
server, it may be enabled to write into one's own write-protected
directories, salvation be damned.

So it's not like samba team is committing a sin, but on the other
hand how far would you go to deny your neighbour a glass of beer if 
he's thirsty, no matter what the Q'uran says.

Regards
Dragan


On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 20:54:12  
 jra wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 07:23:30PM +0100, Dragan Krnic wrote:
>> A trivial case:
>> 
>> executing the following DOS command from the prompt line on a Win2K
SP3:
>> 
>>    %windir%\system32\attrib.exe +R H:\dir
>> 
>> can't set the R(eadonly) flag on my home dirs (2.2.7):
>> 
>>    drwxrwsr-x  4  me  users  4096 Nov 27 17:59 .
>>    drwxr-sr-x  2  me  users  4096 Nov 27 17:59 dir
>>    -r--r--r--  1  me  users     0 Nov 27 17:59 empty.txt
>>    drwxr-sr-x  2  me  users  4096 Nov 27 17:27 profile
>
>This is by design. From the source code :
>
>  if (IS_DOS_DIR(dosmode)) {
>    /* We never make directories read only for the owner as under DOS a user
>       can always create a file in a read-only directory. */
>
>Jeremy.
>

_____________________________________________________________
Get 25MB, POP3, Spam Filtering with LYCOS MAIL PLUS for $19.95/year.
http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus&ref=lmtplus

On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 21:10:19 jra wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 04:06:53PM -0500, daniel.jarboe@custserv.com wrote:
>> True, but was his desire to prevent deletion of the directory, like in
>> DOS?
>> 
>> C:\>mkdir test
>> C:\>attrib +r test
>> C:\>rmdir test
>> Access is denied.
>> C:\>attrib -r test
>> C:\>rmdir test
>> 
>> This works on windows mapped shares, but not on samba.
>
>Deletion of a file/directory in UNIX is dependent on the
>'w' permissions of the enclosing directory (parent), not
>the file/directory itself.
>
>Jeremy.
>
Yes, of course, so just push the w-bit aside for a second until a 
file is created and then put it back again. So, where's the problem? 
Is it woodoo? No, purest white magic. Like lifting the tombstone from 
Lazarus's grave.

How else does restore of so many backups work? If it wouldn't restore
write-protected directories, it shouldn't back 'em up either?

Server side storage of profiles, off-line resources and so many new
things of which our ancestors (Kernighan, Ritchie, Leighton) never 
dreamt are all instances of massive backup objects. There must be a 
way to handle it reasonably even on a legacy system like *nix.

By now,
Dragan


_____________________________________________________________
Get 25MB, POP3, Spam Filtering with LYCOS MAIL PLUS for $19.95/year.
http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus&ref=lmtplus

--

On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 21:48:21  
 jra wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 10:33:11PM +0100, Dragan Krnic wrote:
>> I'm so glad there are kind souls at this time of night. Wait, it
might
>> be day at your place. Good day!
>
>Yep, it's 1:30 in the afternoon here in California :-).
>
>> I don't see a contradiction in setting Readonly flag on one's
own
>> directories and then creating files in them anyways. It's very much
>> like any overruling root privilege. It's just a flag, Jeremy,
it's
>> not our saviour's gospel. Bill knows we don't march over dead
bodies
>> and he's taking unfair advantage of it.
>> 
>> I propose a new smb.conf feature for 3.0:
>> 
>>    [homes & especially profiles]
>>       overrule readonly dirs = Yes/No
>> 
>> Default is "No", but in exceptional cases, like on almost
every samba
>> server, it may be enabled to write into one's own write-protected
directories, salvation be damned.
>
>The flag "dos filemode" is usually used for this purpose, I'll
>investigate using it.
>
>Thanks,
>
>	Jeremy.
>
Yeah, it was deprecated and abolished somewhere between 2.0.7 and 
2.2.7, donno exactly. Resurrect it, please.


_____________________________________________________________
Get 25MB, POP3, Spam Filtering with LYCOS MAIL PLUS for $19.95/year.
http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus&ref=lmtplus

Hi Jeremy,

after commenting out part of the line following the infamous
quote "We never make directories read only for the owner..."
in "samba/source/smbd/dosmode.c" as follows:

   - result |= (S_IFDIR | S_IWUSR);
   + result |= (S_IFDIR /* | S_IWUSR /* 2002/12/01*/ );

I can make my own directories read-only. The advantage is that
with this modification "special" folder links get stored on 
samba server with correct attributes and can be recovered
with them at every new login, thus preserving the "magic" of
so many tricky treats in the profile.

The disadvantage is that if I wants to create another file or
delete an existing one from such read-only directory, I need
to first restore writeability (remove read-only).

The advantage far offsets the disadvantage.

Thanks a lot for the tip.

Dragan


_____________________________________________________________
Get 25MB, POP3, Spam Filtering with LYCOS MAIL PLUS for $19.95/year.
http://login.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus&ref=lmtplus