Strange. I’m not sure there is a way to not use umask. With umask=022, the 
purpose is to set the default permission for newly created files or 
directories, so only the owner has write permissions. How is that a security 
flaw? I guess you can always make umask=000, but then you are enabling everyone 
write permissions as the default and that is a security flaw. 

Regards,
John




> On Mar 25, 2016, at 11:49 PM, William Hermans <yyrk...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I think it should be pretty clear, and if this is not abundantly clear to new 
> users. *DO NOT USE umask* Period. good bye, the end.
> 
> One should leave the default settings and instead work with the system as 
> intended. Instead of creating a serious potential security hole.
> 
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 10:27 PM, John Syne <john3...@gmail.com 
> <mailto:john3...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> 
> The way I think about this is umask turns off permission, which means that 
> the execute permission is provided by gcc.
> 
> For example:
> 
> MBPR:~ john$ umask
> 0022
> MBPR:~ john $ touch test
> MBPR:~ john $ ls -la test
> -rw-r--r--  1 john  staff  0 Mar 25 22:15 test
> MBPR:~ john $ gcc -Wall -o hello hello.c
> MBPR:~ john $ ls -la hello
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 john  staff  8432 Mar 25 22:17 hello
> 
> 
> As you can see, 022 is turning off “group" write and “other" write 
> permissions. So normally, touch would provide 0666, but when umask is 022, 
> permission is anded with the inverse of umask, which provides 0644. So gcc 
> would create a file with 0777 if umask was 000.
> 
> Regards,
> John
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Mar 25, 2016, at 5:30 PM, Mike <bellyac...@gmail.com 
>> <mailto:bellyac...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> On 03/25/2016 08:11 PM, William Hermans wrote:
>>> Im guessing that perhaps gcc's -o option now days enables the executable 
>>> bit on the output file ? I haven't looked into that however.
>> Nothing at all to do with gcc, reread what I already posted...
>> 
>> Mike
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 5:08 PM, William Hermans <yyrk...@gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:yyrk...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> No, Mike is absolutely correct. dot's meaning in this context is current 
>>> directory, and slash is just a path modifier / separator. Putting the file 
>>> in ones $PATH would solve the "problem" of having to use dot slash I've 
>>> know  this forever, I do not know why I was thinking that chmod +x would 
>>> solve that "issue", because it wont.
>>> 
>>> I do recall at some point perhaps not too long ago that changing file 
>>> permissions to executable was required. But now days this does not seem to 
>>> be the case . . . I've always in the last several years use ./executable 
>>> until I put the executable into my local path . . .
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Mike < 
>>> <mailto:bellyac...@gmail.com>bellyac...@gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:bellyac...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> On 03/25/2016 02:03 PM, William Hermans wrote:
>>>> No chmod needed *IF* you precede the command with a dot slash "./". So 
>>>> when you run a regular Linux command do you have to type this dot slash ? 
>>>> No because chmod +x is run on the executable at some point . . .
>>>> 
>>>> So be nice to fellow group users who actually know what they're talking 
>>>> about, and have been on this list a lot longer than you.
>>> Maybe we need to learn what ./ does...  It has absolutely nothing to do 
>>> with a files permissions or whether it's executable or not.  It's use is 
>>> regarding the lack of the current directory "." in one's PATH variable.  
>>> Umask is (largely) what controls what permissions a file is created with.
>>> 
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> ls -al
>>> total 12
>>> drwxr-xr-x  2 mike mike 4096 Mar 25 17:07 .
>>> drwxr-xr-x 37 mike mike 4096 Mar 25 16:46 ..
>>> -rw-r--r--  1 mike mike   78 Mar 25 16:47 hello.c
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> umask
>>> 0022
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> gcc -Wall 
>>> -o hello hello.c 
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> ls -l
>>> total 12
>>> -rwxr-xr-x 1 mike mike 6696 Mar 25 17:08 hello
>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 mike mike   78 Mar 25 16:47 hello.c
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> hello
>>> bash: hello: command not found
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> ./hello 
>>> Hello, world!
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> umask 0137
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> gcc -Wall 
>>> -o hello hello.c 
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> ls -l
>>> total 12
>>> -rw-r----- 1 mike mike 6696 Mar 25 17:09 hello
>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 mike mike   78 Mar 25 16:47 hello.c
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> hello
>>> bash: hello: command not found
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> ./hello
>>> bash: ./hello: Permission denied
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> ls -l
>>> total 12
>>> -rw-r----- 1 mike mike 6696 Mar 25 17:09 hello
>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 mike mike   78 Mar 25 16:47 hello.c
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> chmod 0750 
>>> hello
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> ls -l
>>> total 12
>>> -rwxr-x--- 1 mike mike 6696 Mar 25 17:09 hello
>>> -rw-r--r-- 1 mike mike   78 Mar 25 16:47 hello.c
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> ./hello 
>>> Hello, world!
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> umask 022
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$> umask
>>> 0022
>>> mike@pride-n-joy:~/test.d$ <mailto:mike@pride-n-joy:%7E/test.d$>
>>> 
>>> Mike 
>>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Dieter Wirz < 
>>>> <mailto:didi.w...@gmail.com>didi.w...@gmail.com 
>>>> <mailto:didi.w...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 3:57 PM, Graham Haddock < 
>>>> <mailto:gra...@flexradio.com>gra...@flexradio.com 
>>>> <mailto:gra...@flexradio.com>> wrote:
>>>> > Yes.
>>>> > sudo chmod 755 myprogram
>>>> > or
>>>> > sudo chmod 755 myprogram.o
>>>> >
>>>> Graham, please do not tell fairy tails on this list!
>>>> 
>>>> $ echo '#include <stdio.h>' > hello.c
>>>> $ echo 'int main (void) {  printf ("Hello, world!\n");   return 0; }' >> 
>>>> hello.c
>>>> $ cat hello.c
>>>> #include <stdio.h>
>>>> int main (void) {  printf ("Hello, world!\n");   return 0; }
>>>> $ gcc -Wall -o hello hello.c
>>>> $ ./hello
>>>> Hello, world!
>>>> $ ls -l
>>>> total 12
>>>> -rwxrwxr-x 1 dw dw 7332 Mar 25 16:32 hello
>>>> -rw-rw-r-- 1 dw dw   80 Mar 25 16:31 hello.c
>>>> $
>>>> 
>>>> No chmod needed, no myprogram.o there, why the sudo????
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> For more options, visit  
>>> <http://beagleboard.org/discuss>http://beagleboard.org/discuss 
>>> <http://beagleboard.org/discuss>
>>> --- 
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>>> "BeagleBoard" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>>> email to  
>>> <mailto:beagleboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>beagleboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
>>>  <mailto:beagleboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
>>> For more options, visit  
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss 
>>> <http://beagleboard.org/discuss>
>>> --- 
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>>> "BeagleBoard" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>>> email to beagleboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
>>> <mailto:beagleboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss 
>> <http://beagleboard.org/discuss>
>> --- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "BeagleBoard" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to beagleboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
>> <mailto:beagleboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
> 
> 
> -- 
> For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss 
> <http://beagleboard.org/discuss>
> --- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "BeagleBoard" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to beagleboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> <mailto:beagleboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
> 
> 
> -- 
> For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss 
> <http://beagleboard.org/discuss>
> --- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "BeagleBoard" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to beagleboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> <mailto:beagleboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.

-- 
For more options, visit http://beagleboard.org/discuss
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"BeagleBoard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to beagleboard+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to