Re: What happened to umask?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 5/20/22 21:32, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 9:08 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 8:13 PM Owen Taylor <otaylor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> For years, Red Hat Linux / Fedora systems have had a umask of 0002 for regular users as part of the "user private group" scheme [*]. Basically the idea is that you can set a directory group-sticky and use it as a common work area for a group of users.
>>>
>>> A change a couple of years ago seems to have partially changed this - the code in /etc/profile was removed with the idea that it should be controlled by pam_umask / login.defs instead.
>>>
>>>  https://pagure.io/setup/c/102b349c39e196cc1e34e645c9310acdab7afeef?branch=master
>>>  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1722387
>>>
>>> However, the corresponding code in /etc/bashrc was left .This means that for a *login* shell (VT, ssh session, etc.) the umask is 0022 but for an interactive *non-login* shell (e.g., gnome-terminal with default settings) the umask stayed 0002.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure how much the change from 0002 to 0022 was thought through - that idea first appears in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1722387#c4 with Tomas Mraz saying:  I do not think that the default umask should be 002 for regular users." - I would have expected a short change proposal, honestly.
>>>
>>> It seems like we need to do one of two things:
>>>
>>>  - Go back to the old behavior, maybe by using the usergroups option to pam_umask and removing the code from /etc/bashrc
>>>  - Or just go fully to 0022 by removing the code from /etc/bashrc.
>>>
>>> What do people think? If the current situation has lasted for several years, it clearly isn't *that* much of a concern to most people :-)
>>>
>>> - Owen
>>>
>>> [*] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fedora/latest/system-administrators-guide/basic-system-configuration/Managing_Users_and_Groups/#s2-users-groups-private-groups
>>>
>>
>> I think we should complete the transition to 0022 umask. IIRC, this is
>> how most Linux distributions have it work today, so we should fall in
>> line here, unless there's a compelling reason not to.
> 
> This came up for me a few days ago. Some high security distributions
> elect to set the umask to '077' by default, typically though a setting
> in /etc/profile.d/, so that sharing with the group or with others
> requires specific steps.

I think Fedora should go use an 0077 umask for this reason.

-- 
Sincerely,
Demi Marie Obenour (she/her/hers)

Attachment: OpenPGP_0xB288B55FFF9C22C1.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux