Re: Seems like a bug with mkfifo -m
you say 'ls' is a problem source. Then i have to be more specific with the problem to not miss any other possible problems around it. My use case is this: I have an ssh rsa keys dynamically loaded in environment variables. Those variables then expaned and piped to the named pipe and then the pipe instantly read by ssh-add. I know there could be other ways to ssh-add from environment, but its just our specifics. So the actual commands looks like this: $ mkfifo -m 0600 somefifo # The KEY contains ssh rsa private key data $ echo $KEY > somefifo | ssh-add somefifo @ WARNING: UNPROTECTED PRIVATE KEY FILE! @ Permissions 0644 for 'somefifo' are too open. It is required that your private key files are NOT accessible by others. This private key will be ignored. -- Sent from: http://cygwin.1069669.n5.nabble.com/Cygwin-list-f3.html -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation:https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Seems like a bug with mkfifo -m
On May 28 13:39, Ken Brown via Cygwin wrote: > On 5/28/2020 1:31 PM, yoshi kakbudto wrote: > > you say 'ls' is a problem source. Then i have to be more specific with the > > problem to not miss any other possible problems around it. > > > > My use case is this: I have an ssh rsa keys dynamically loaded in > > environment variables. > > Those variables then expaned and piped to the named pipe and then the pipe > > instantly read by ssh-add. > > I know there could be other ways to ssh-add from environment, but its just > > our specifics. > > So the actual commands looks like this: > > > > $ mkfifo -m 0600 somefifo > > > > # The KEY contains ssh rsa private key data > > $ echo $KEY > somefifo | ssh-add somefifo > > > > > > @ WARNING: UNPROTECTED PRIVATE KEY FILE! @ > > > > Permissions 0644 for 'somefifo' are too open. > > It is required that your private key files are NOT accessible by others. > > This private key will be ignored. > > Sorry, I shouldn't have said the problem was with ls. The problem was > actually with stat, and it's fixed now. You should be able to test it the > next time Corinna creates a snapshot. Done. Try the latest snapshot from https://cygwin.com/snapshots/ Thanks, Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Cygwin Maintainer -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation:https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Seems like a bug with mkfifo -m
On 5/28/2020 1:31 PM, yoshi kakbudto wrote: you say 'ls' is a problem source. Then i have to be more specific with the problem to not miss any other possible problems around it. My use case is this: I have an ssh rsa keys dynamically loaded in environment variables. Those variables then expaned and piped to the named pipe and then the pipe instantly read by ssh-add. I know there could be other ways to ssh-add from environment, but its just our specifics. So the actual commands looks like this: $ mkfifo -m 0600 somefifo # The KEY contains ssh rsa private key data $ echo $KEY > somefifo | ssh-add somefifo @ WARNING: UNPROTECTED PRIVATE KEY FILE! @ Permissions 0644 for 'somefifo' are too open. It is required that your private key files are NOT accessible by others. This private key will be ignored. Sorry, I shouldn't have said the problem was with ls. The problem was actually with stat, and it's fixed now. You should be able to test it the next time Corinna creates a snapshot. Ken -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation:https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Seems like a bug with mkfifo -m
On 5/28/2020 11:28 AM, Ken Brown via Cygwin wrote: On 5/28/2020 10:52 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On May 28 09:16, Ken Brown via Cygwin wrote: On 5/28/2020 4:12 AM, Дмитрий Есарев via Cygwin wrote: Hi, all When i ran cygwin 2.x, i used mkfifo -m 0600 file to create a named pipe with no user and group permissions. in the latest cygwin the above command creates device with 0644 permissions. And i cant drop it to 0600: cygcheck.exe -V cygcheck (cygwin) 3.1.4 $ umask 0077 $ touch somefile; ls -l somefile -rw--- 1 admin absent 0 may 26 18:15 somefile $ mkfifo -m 0600 somefifo; ls -l somefifo prw-r--r-- 1 admin absent 0 may 26 18:16 somefifo $ chmod 600 somefifo; ls -l somefifo prw-r--r-- 1 admin absent 0 may 26 18:16 somefifo In old-good cygwin 2.x the command works as expected: $ cygcheck.exe -V cygcheck (cygwin) 2.9.0 $ umask 0022 $ mkfifo -m 0600 somefifo; ls -l somefifo prw--- 1 builduser Domain Users 0 May 26 18:21 somefifo Thanks for the report. The problem isn't with mkfifo, it's with the permission information reported by ls. I did a bisection of the Cygwin development repo and found that the regression was introduced by the following commit: commit f36262d56ac78f04de147746ce4a85c6155e4a23 Author: Corinna Vinschen Date: Wed Jan 29 15:14:05 2020 +0100 Cygwin: stat: fix st_mode of fifos I'll take a look if Corinna doesn't get to it first. Not sure what I was thinking at the time. I recall having observed something funny, but the patch was apparently wrong. Just revert it at your discretion, Ken. I remember we had an IRC discussion about it, but I can't remember what the issue was. I'll look a little more closely before reverting. OK, it turned out that part of that patch needed to be reverted. It's done now. Ken -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation:https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Seems like a bug with mkfifo -m
On 5/28/2020 10:52 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote: On May 28 09:16, Ken Brown via Cygwin wrote: On 5/28/2020 4:12 AM, Дмитрий Есарев via Cygwin wrote: Hi, all When i ran cygwin 2.x, i used mkfifo -m 0600 file to create a named pipe with no user and group permissions. in the latest cygwin the above command creates device with 0644 permissions. And i cant drop it to 0600: cygcheck.exe -V cygcheck (cygwin) 3.1.4 $ umask 0077 $ touch somefile; ls -l somefile -rw--- 1 admin absent 0 may 26 18:15 somefile $ mkfifo -m 0600 somefifo; ls -l somefifo prw-r--r-- 1 admin absent 0 may 26 18:16 somefifo $ chmod 600 somefifo; ls -l somefifo prw-r--r-- 1 admin absent 0 may 26 18:16 somefifo In old-good cygwin 2.x the command works as expected: $ cygcheck.exe -V cygcheck (cygwin) 2.9.0 $ umask 0022 $ mkfifo -m 0600 somefifo; ls -l somefifo prw--- 1 builduser Domain Users 0 May 26 18:21 somefifo Thanks for the report. The problem isn't with mkfifo, it's with the permission information reported by ls. I did a bisection of the Cygwin development repo and found that the regression was introduced by the following commit: commit f36262d56ac78f04de147746ce4a85c6155e4a23 Author: Corinna Vinschen Date: Wed Jan 29 15:14:05 2020 +0100 Cygwin: stat: fix st_mode of fifos I'll take a look if Corinna doesn't get to it first. Not sure what I was thinking at the time. I recall having observed something funny, but the patch was apparently wrong. Just revert it at your discretion, Ken. I remember we had an IRC discussion about it, but I can't remember what the issue was. I'll look a little more closely before reverting. Ken -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation:https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Seems like a bug with mkfifo -m
On May 28 09:16, Ken Brown via Cygwin wrote: > On 5/28/2020 4:12 AM, Дмитрий Есарев via Cygwin wrote: > > Hi, all > > > > When i ran cygwin 2.x, i used mkfifo -m 0600 file to create a named pipe > > with no user and group permissions. > > > > in the latest cygwin the above command creates device with 0644 > > permissions. And i cant drop it to 0600: > > > > cygcheck.exe -V > > cygcheck (cygwin) 3.1.4 > > > > $ umask 0077 > > $ touch somefile; ls -l somefile > > -rw--- 1 admin absent 0 may 26 18:15 somefile > > > > $ mkfifo -m 0600 somefifo; ls -l somefifo > > prw-r--r-- 1 admin absent 0 may 26 18:16 somefifo > > > > $ chmod 600 somefifo; ls -l somefifo > > prw-r--r-- 1 admin absent 0 may 26 18:16 somefifo > > > > > > > > In old-good cygwin 2.x the command works as expected: > > > > $ cygcheck.exe -V > > cygcheck (cygwin) 2.9.0 > > > > $ umask > > 0022 > > > > $ mkfifo -m 0600 somefifo; ls -l somefifo > > prw--- 1 builduser Domain Users 0 May 26 18:21 somefifo > > Thanks for the report. The problem isn't with mkfifo, it's with the > permission information reported by ls. I did a bisection of the Cygwin > development repo and found that the regression was introduced by the > following commit: > > commit f36262d56ac78f04de147746ce4a85c6155e4a23 > Author: Corinna Vinschen > Date: Wed Jan 29 15:14:05 2020 +0100 > > Cygwin: stat: fix st_mode of fifos > > I'll take a look if Corinna doesn't get to it first. Not sure what I was thinking at the time. I recall having observed something funny, but the patch was apparently wrong. Just revert it at your discretion, Ken. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Cygwin Maintainer -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation:https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Re: Seems like a bug with mkfifo -m
On 5/28/2020 4:12 AM, Дмитрий Есарев via Cygwin wrote: Hi, all When i ran cygwin 2.x, i used mkfifo -m 0600 file to create a named pipe with no user and group permissions. in the latest cygwin the above command creates device with 0644 permissions. And i cant drop it to 0600: cygcheck.exe -V cygcheck (cygwin) 3.1.4 $ umask 0077 $ touch somefile; ls -l somefile -rw--- 1 admin absent 0 may 26 18:15 somefile $ mkfifo -m 0600 somefifo; ls -l somefifo prw-r--r-- 1 admin absent 0 may 26 18:16 somefifo $ chmod 600 somefifo; ls -l somefifo prw-r--r-- 1 admin absent 0 may 26 18:16 somefifo In old-good cygwin 2.x the command works as expected: $ cygcheck.exe -V cygcheck (cygwin) 2.9.0 $ umask 0022 $ mkfifo -m 0600 somefifo; ls -l somefifo prw--- 1 builduser Domain Users 0 May 26 18:21 somefifo Thanks for the report. The problem isn't with mkfifo, it's with the permission information reported by ls. I did a bisection of the Cygwin development repo and found that the regression was introduced by the following commit: commit f36262d56ac78f04de147746ce4a85c6155e4a23 Author: Corinna Vinschen Date: Wed Jan 29 15:14:05 2020 +0100 Cygwin: stat: fix st_mode of fifos I'll take a look if Corinna doesn't get to it first. Ken -- Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation:https://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
