similar to: [Bug 1844] Explicit file permissions enhancement to sftp-server

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1844 Jakub Jelen <jjelen at redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Attachment #2547|0 |1 is obsolete| | --- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelen <jjelen at redhat.com> ---

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1844 Summary: Explicit file permissions enhancement to sftp-server Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 5.6p1 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P2 Component: sftp-server AssignedTo: unassigned-bugs at mindrot.org

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1844 Jakub Jelen <jjelen at redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jjelen at redhat.com --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelen <jjelen at redhat.com> --- Created attachment 2547

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1844 drzraf <raphael.droz+floss at gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |raphael.droz+floss at gmail.co | |m -- You are receiving this

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1844 leon at heess.me changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |leon at heess.me --- Comment #8 from leon at heess.me --- Please do add this feature! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1844 Gabriel <redimido at gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |redimido at gmail.com --- Comment #9 from Gabriel <redimido at gmail.com> --- It is 2020 and this is still

Hi, After reading the source code of openssh and man page of sftp. In sftp.h it define 27 /* 28 * draft-ietf-secsh-filexfer-01.txt 29 */ 30 31 /* version */ 32 #define SSH2_FILEXFER_VERSION 3 and In the end of the man page, T. Ylonen and S. Lehtinen, SSH File Transfer Protocol, draft-ietf-secsh-filexfer-00.txt, January 2001, work in progress material. In wikipedia of "SSH File

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2948 Bug ID: 2948 Summary: implement "copy-data" sftp extension Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: -current Hardware: All URL: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-secsh-filexfer- extensions-00#section-7 OS: All Status: NEW

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1953 --- Comment #3 from Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo at scientia.net> --- Does anyone know whether anything is going on with SFTP (especially also with repsect to ACLs and XATTRs)? More than a year ago we saw this http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moonesamy-secsh-filexfer-00 which apparently tried to restart the draft-ietf-secsh-filexfer

Hello, I've gathered from searching Bugzilla[1][2] that a patch to update OpenSSH's SFTP implementation to support version 4 or above of the protocol is unlikely to be accepted. However, I find myself wishing for the name-based owner and group handling specified in version 4 of the spec[3]. As a possible compromise, if I submitted a patch to add an OpenSSH-specific extension to return

Dear list, Attached is a patch that adds support for the SSH_FXP_LINK request, as described in draft-ietf-secsh-filexfer-07 onwards, to the sftp server and client. It is for and has been tested on the current portable snapshot but also applies to openbsd CVS. Thanks, -- Peter -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: openssh-sftp-hardlink-pcvs-v2.patch

I am using sshfs with FUSE to mount a remote directory over ssh/sftp (on linux). It would be nice if df could be able to show the total size/free space of the mounted directory. I am aware that returning size/free space would have some limitations. For example, if a subdir of the mounted directory has another filesystem mounted on the remote server, this can not be represented simply. However,

>Is there a simple way to achieve this behavior? Is there a document on >the sftp protocol somewhere? http://search.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-secsh-filexfer-00.txt -- Darren J Moffat

Hello, This is probably a long email, but please bear with me. I plan to submit a patch and would like to explain what I will do before doing it so I don't lose time if there's some flaw in my plan. I currently use sshfs to mount directories from some computers and a NAS into other computers. I recently noticed that when copying some files from one computer into one of these sshfs

Hello again, Even with umask working (thanks very much!) I have found that I require more control over file permissions with sftp-server/internal-sftp. Please see the attached patch. It adds yet another option to sftp-server (-m) that will force file permissions. I have a been running a patched version of 5.6p1 under RHEL4 in production with no problems. Please consider including this change

there is now a draft: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-secsh-filexfer-00.txt if someone could please check whether sftp-server.c comlies :)

Reading 6.10 Dealing with Symbolic links in http://www.openssh.org/txt/draft-ietf-secsh-filexfer-02.txt it seems to say that the first argument ('linkpath') specifies the name of the symlink file to create. ("linkpath' specifies the path name of the symlink to be created"). However, sftp-server.c:process_symlink() seems to reverse this. I.E. the first argument

Hi, I've already discussed this issue in SSHSCI's SSH 2.2 context on ssh at clinet.fi list. My standpoint is that it's wrong and meaningless to perform chown in sftp-server as the file is most likely copied between systems with distinct accounting system where user is not necessarily (and even unlikely) has same numeric user id. The original bug report was that user couldn't

Hello again, Now that umask is working (thanks very much!) I have found that I would like to see more control over sftp-server/internal-sftp file permissions. Given that previous patches (sftp file control comes to mind) were produced indicates there are other users that would also like more control over file permissions. My solution was to add yet another option to sftp-server/internal-sftp

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1953 TJ Saunders <tj at castaglia.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |tj at castaglia.org --- Comment #6 from TJ Saunders <tj at castaglia.org> --- Instead of using custom SFTP