On Thu 10 Nov 2016 at 17:05:06 (-0600), Richard Owlett wrote: > On 11/10/2016 1:52 PM, David Wright wrote: > >On Thu 10 Nov 2016 at 04:53:47 (-0600), Richard Owlett wrote: > > > >>Yes, but not in the context of a sub-project from last few days. > >>I suspect what I aiming at might look like - the groups and > >>permission bits set at time partition created, thus avoiding games > >>with /etc/fstab . > >> > >>richard@jessie-defaults:~$ > >>richard@jessie-defaults:~$ ls -l /dev/sd* > >>brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 0 Nov 10 03:35 /dev/sda > >>brw-rw---- 1 root owl 8, 1 Nov 10 03:35 /dev/sda1 > >>brw-rw-r-- 1 root owl 8, 2 Nov 10 03:35 /dev/sda2 > >>brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 3 Nov 10 03:35 /dev/sda3 > >>brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 5 Nov 10 03:35 /dev/sda5 > >>brw-rw---- 1 root disk 8, 16 Nov 10 04:43 /dev/sdb > >>br--rw-r-- 1 root owl 8, 17 Nov 10 04:43 /dev/sdb1 > > > > ↑ is there a purpose behind the missing w ? > > Yes. My rational is in my rather verbose post > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2016/11/msg00361.html . > Linux evidently does not do things "my way" [apologies to a fast > food chain].
Should I take it that last sentence means you are aware root can write over a file even if the permission is --------- , let alone r-------- , so you have no precaution as well as no protection. Cheers, David.