URL: https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/457 Title: #457: ipa: Removal of umask(0) in selinux_child
sumit-bose commented: """ Hi, I'd like to revive this PR with a different view on the topic. I tend to prefer to keep the umask() calls, not as a workaround, but as a precaution. Since we expect the libsemange calls to create files or directories and change the umask of the process saving and resetting 'our' umask would protect us from potential issue in the future where libsemange sets the umask() but for whatever reasons it is not set back to its original value. If we can agree on this view I wonder if @amitkumar50 would like to update that patch so that only the comment is replaced with a new one explaining why umask() is used? bye, Sumit """ See the full comment at https://github.com/SSSD/sssd/pull/457#issuecomment-494749209
_______________________________________________ sssd-devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedorahosted.org/archives/list/[email protected]
