similar to: umask problem

Hi all, Currently, umask takes effect when we create device file via mknod, as bellow commands show: ><fs> mknod-b 0760 8 1 /dev/sdf ><fs> ll /dev/sdf brwxr----- 1 root root 8, 1 Apr 15 11:10 /sysroot/dev/sdf But I wonder whether it is reasonable? For mknod(1), when we use option -m mode, we set file permission bits to MODE, not a=rw - umask. Should this also be applicable

On the problem summarized below, I have some additional information, and what I believe is a bug in the cifs client. Can anyone advise on how/where to file the bug report ? I found out what is the probable cause of the problem above, but not what the solution is. I tried the above mentioned commands, but using different umasks on the client. I saw that when a directory is created, the

Hi, all! I'm new to dovecot but trying to setup read-only public folders for different user groups. My goal is to create several public folder such as sales, operation etc with per user index. But I have some problem which I can't resolve with Google and Dovecot.Org. Now users can see and subscribe to test folder "share", but I can't block ability to delete messages via

Hi all, can you clarify my doubts about sieve? I understand what is it, but what's the different between use exim with rules + dovecot and use exim + dovecot-lda + sieve rules? i can create many kind of rules on exim, then i don't get the difference. if someone is so kind to explain me the main points i'll appreciate it! Regards, Matteo

Hi all, I am having an issue with permission that may be a bug. The issue happens when moving / copying a message from a folder to another : sometimes the message gets the wrong permission (umask). The typical use case is, inside a maildir box and within imap, moving a spam message to the spam folder. Then a cron script is supposed to access to it to feed the antispam database. I wish the

Since Linux 4.7, the process umask is available in /proc/<pid>/status. See: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/3e42979e65dace1f9268dd5440e5ab096b8dee59 Use this value if available, else fall back to the existing codepath for Linux <= 4.6 and other Unix. --- src/umask.c | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 78 insertions(+), 8

On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 12:12:21PM +0300, Roman Kagan wrote: > On Sat, May 21, 2016 at 01:14:40PM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > + path = safe_asprintf (g, "/proc/%d/status", getpid ()); > > Why not "/proc/self/status"? Hmm indeed why not :-( I will fix it ... Rich. -- Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones Read

Hi! I am experiencing troubles concerning the inheritance of the setgid bit if a new mailbox is created with dovecot-lda. If it is created with dovecot/imap, everything works fine. dovecot-lda is called from postfix like this: ---------- mailbox_command = /usr/local/sbin/postfix-lda.sh ---------- logger -p mail.info -t postfix-lda "H: $HOME, S: $SENDER, R: $RECIPIENT, U: $(umask), id:

Daniele Palumbo <daniele@retaggio.net> wrote: >hi. > >I have troubles of global readable bit on new file created on samba. >I wish to have a 660 permission on new files, instead i've got 664. > >also, if i create an empty files it will get 644 permmission, instead of 660. > >directory creation instead seems fine. > >Below my environmnent and tests.

On 7/21/20 9:59 AM, Simon Matter wrote: >> On 7/19/20 10:41 PM, Simon Matter via CentOS wrote: >>>> On 7/13/20 6:40 PM, Emmett Culley via CentOS wrote: >>>>> I need to set the umask for apache to 002.? I've tried every idea I've >>>>> found on the internet, but nothing make a difference.? Most suggest >>>>> that

On 7/19/20 10:41 PM, Simon Matter via CentOS wrote: >> On 7/13/20 6:40 PM, Emmett Culley via CentOS wrote: >>> I need to set the umask for apache to 002.? I've tried every idea I've >>> found on the internet, but nothing make a difference.? Most suggest that >>> I put "umask 002" in /etc/sysconfig/httpd, but that doesn't seem to make

I'm running OpenSSH 5.1p1 on openSUSE 10.3 (i586) and I want to setup chroot jails for certain SFTP-only users. I use the following lines in my sshd_config file: Match Group sftponly ChrootDirectory /home/chroot-%u ForceCommand internal-sftp It works great. The problem is that some of my users need umask 002 for their uploads. I tried a few ways to achieve this: * set umask in sshrc,

>> I need to set the umask for apache to 002. I've tried every idea I've found on the internet, but nothing make a difference. Most suggest that I put "umask 002" in /etc/sysconfig/httpd, but that doesn't seem to make a difference.>> >> Other's suggest adding something to the httpd.service script for systemd. And that doesn't make any

Hey folks-- When ssh creates a known_hosts file for a user, it disregards the currently-set umask, and can actually turn on mode bits that the user has explicitly masked. While i'm happy to have ssh make files *more* secure than my umask (in situations where that's reasonable, like the creation of new ssh keys, etc), i'm not sure that i see the point in ssh making the files more open

http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1229 Summary: No way to set default umask for SFTP server Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 4.3p2 Platform: Other OS/Version: Mac OS X Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: sftp-server AssignedTo: bitbucket at mindrot.org

We have a problem whereby Nautilus is not using the umask setting defined by the user (e.g. when creating directories via the the 'Places' menu). The umask used by Nautilus is 022, but the shell umask (in our case) is set to 002 A quick search seems to suggest that this a common problem, and various methods are suggested to 'fix' this - the only way that appears to work on

On 7/13/20 6:40 PM, Emmett Culley via CentOS wrote: > I need to set the umask for apache to 002.? I've tried every idea I've found on the internet, but nothing make a difference.? Most suggest that I put "umask 002" in /etc/sysconfig/httpd, but that doesn't seem to make a difference.? Other's suggest adding something to the httpd.service script for systemd.? And that

Using dovecot 1.0rc15, together with postfix and dovecot-lda. umask is set to 0007. This should ensure directories and files get created with read/write permissions for both user and group. However, dovecot-lda writes files with 600 permissions, instead of 660. So dovecot does not seem to respect the umask configuration property for local mail delivery. In my particular case, I have

Hey all, We have the following set in /etc/profile : umask 0002 so that it will affect all users. That should create all files as 664 and all directories as 775 if I'm not mistaken. Well I logged into the machine after this was set and just created a file as one of the users who complained about permissions settings on files. And this is what I saw: [user1 at qa_host ~]$ ls -l test_qa

Normally, in the !UseLogin case on a system with login classes, the umask is set implicitly by the first setusercontext() call in do_setusercontext() in session.c. However, FreeBSD treats the umask differently from other login settings: unless running with the target user's UID, it will only apply the value from /etc/login.conf, not that from the user's ~/.login.conf. The patch below