On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 12:22:00PM +0100, Petr Cech wrote:
> On 10/21/2015 03:19 PM, Petr Cech wrote:
> >On 10/12/2015 11:37 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> From a15acee2495ee12190e711f3344e14c54fc73062 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Petr Cech
> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015
On 10/21/2015 03:19 PM, Petr Cech wrote:
On 10/12/2015 11:37 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> From a15acee2495ee12190e711f3344e14c54fc73062 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>From: Petr Cech
>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 08:57:15 -0400
>Subject: [PATCH 10/11] KRB5_CHILD: More restrictive umask
>
>We
On (05/11/15 12:58), Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 12:22:00PM +0100, Petr Cech wrote:
>> On 10/21/2015 03:19 PM, Petr Cech wrote:
>> >On 10/12/2015 11:37 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
>> From a15acee2495ee12190e711f3344e14c54fc73062 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Petr
On 10/12/2015 11:37 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> From a15acee2495ee12190e711f3344e14c54fc73062 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>From: Petr Cech
>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 08:57:15 -0400
>Subject: [PATCH 10/11] KRB5_CHILD: More restrictive umask
>
>We could use more restrictive umask in
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 01:26:23PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> ACK to the attached patches.
CI: http://sssd-ci.duckdns.org/logs/job/30/28/summary.html
master:
* c1584502dec8ae19dfd89c6e598cc7648dfd78a6
* c4a1191d673e4368f1831cbeb4d75b15e51ff6db
*
On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 04:40:55PM +0200, Petr Cech wrote:
> >> From a15acee2495ee12190e711f3344e14c54fc73062 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> >>From: Petr Cech
> >>Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 08:57:15 -0400
> >>Subject: [PATCH 10/11] KRB5_CHILD: More restrictive umask
> >>
> >>We could use
On 10/12/2015 11:37 AM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 03:55:17PM +0200, Petr Cech wrote:
On 10/04/2015 09:39 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
Finally, because I'm a lazy reviewer, I would prefer:
- a patch that converts 0177 to DFL, with a comment around the macro
definition
On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 03:55:17PM +0200, Petr Cech wrote:
> On 10/04/2015 09:39 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >Finally, because I'm a lazy reviewer, I would prefer:
> > - a patch that converts 0177 to DFL, with a comment around the macro
> > definition that this is the default secure umask
On 10/04/2015 09:39 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
Finally, because I'm a lazy reviewer, I would prefer:
- a patch that converts 0177 to DFL, with a comment around the macro
definition that this is the default secure umask
- a patch that converts 0077 to DFL_X, with a comment around
On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 02:06:50PM +0200, Petr Cech wrote:
> On 10/01/2015 01:19 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> >On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 12:38:49PM +0200, Petr Cech wrote:
> >>Bump.
> >
> Thanks for reply, Jakub.
>
> >Why was 077 changed for 0177?
> This change is something, which I think was
On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 09:15:05PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 02:06:50PM +0200, Petr Cech wrote:
> > On 10/01/2015 01:19 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > >On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 12:38:49PM +0200, Petr Cech wrote:
> > >>Bump.
> > >
> > Thanks for reply, Jakub.
> >
> > >Why
On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 09:20:17PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 04, 2015 at 09:15:05PM +0200, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 02:06:50PM +0200, Petr Cech wrote:
> > > On 10/01/2015 01:19 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
> > > >On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 12:38:49PM +0200, Petr Cech
On 10/01/2015 01:19 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 12:38:49PM +0200, Petr Cech wrote:
Bump.
Thanks for reply, Jakub.
Why was 077 changed for 0177?
This change is something, which I think was discussed earlier in this
thread.
# pcech:
# > I would like to ask you if we
On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 12:38:49PM +0200, Petr Cech wrote:
> Bump.
Why was 077 changed for 0177?
About the name -- shouldn't we say just "SSS_DFL_UMASK" ? We are a
security project, therefore restrictive by default :-)
___
sssd-devel mailing list
Bump.
___
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
On 09/11/2015 01:47 PM, Jakub Hrozek wrote:
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 12:27:17PM +0200, Petr Cech wrote:
Hi,
I am reviewing umask() in our code according to
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2424
There are many use like umask(DFL_RSP_UMASK):
src/responder/autofs/autofssrv.c:223
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 12:27:17PM +0200, Petr Cech wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am reviewing umask() in our code according to
> https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2424
>
> There are many use like umask(DFL_RSP_UMASK):
> src/responder/autofs/autofssrv.c:223
> src/responder/ifp/ifpsrv.c:401
>
Hi,
I am reviewing umask() in our code according to
https://fedorahosted.org/sssd/ticket/2424
There are many use like umask(DFL_RSP_UMASK):
src/responder/autofs/autofssrv.c:223
src/responder/ifp/ifpsrv.c:401
src/responder/nss/nsssrv.c:589
src/responder/pac/pacsrv.c:232
18 matches
Mail list logo