Gunnar Wolf wrote:
>
> A.D.F. dijo [Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 09:16:04PM +0000]:
> > > If we went the let's-try-to-make-root-safe way, we would have to fix a
> > > bunch of additional issues. For instance, it wouldn't make sense to
> > > chroot the server if it runs as root, but again, that is not a problem
> > > that we ought to face.
> >
> > I understand the reasoning,
> > but indeed above proposal is not about fixing root security,
> > but to introduce a new and inexpensive way to limit web access
> > to normal user's files in systems that don't use ACLs.
> >
> > Think about a user that runs Cherokee but that don't want
> > to give public access to a few files / directories
> > placed below web root and that is not convenient
> > to place somewhere else because the server is chrooted,
> > it runs with an unpriviledge user, there are programs
> > that use those specific paths, etc.
>
> Umh, for a non-root user, if you have a chmod 000 directory in the
> path, the system won't try to enter:
>
> 0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mkdir -p /tmp/1/1/1/1/1
> 0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] chmod 000 /tmp/1/1/1
> 0 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ls -l /tmp/1/1/1/1
> ls: cannot access /tmp/1/1/1/1: Permission denied
>
> So you'd be patching this only for the very corner case when you are
> running as root _and_ are trying to hide something from root. Does it
> make sense?
The aim would be that your user would be able to read/write those files
but if they haven't the world bit on they would not be served
by Cherokee, i.e.:
-rw-rw--- 1 www httpd this-file-is-not-served.jpg
-rw-rw-r- 1 www httpd this-file-is-served.gif
drwxrwxr-- 2 www httpd this-directory-is-not-accessible
Directories could be accessed only if x access bit is set.
--
Nick Name: A.D.F.
E-Mail: <adefacc () tin ! it>
E-Mail-Format: Plain Text only (please); view using font Courier New
--
_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
[email protected]
http://cherokee-project.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cherokee
