From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: iisaman@umich.edu
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] remove open share mode file permission check
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2010 20:38:02 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100817003802.GE7764@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100817003734.GD7764@fieldses.org>
From: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
First, the ability to deny reads is generally considered stronger than
the ability to deny writes, so if anything should require special
permissions it is the former.
Second, this test contradicts observed Windows behavior. Testing shows
that Windows prohits an opener without write permissions from denying
reads. It will allow such an open, but will then also allow concurrent
read opens, failing to enforce the DENY_WRITE.
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@citi.umich.edu>
---
lib/nfs4/servertests/st_open.py | 21 ---------------------
1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/nfs4/servertests/st_open.py b/lib/nfs4/servertests/st_open.py
index 64deb9f..1e5ec70 100644
--- a/lib/nfs4/servertests/st_open.py
+++ b/lib/nfs4/servertests/st_open.py
@@ -347,27 +347,6 @@ def testShareConflict1(t, env):
"Trying to open a file with deny=WRITE "
"that was already opened with access=WRITE")
-# FRED - is this right response? or should it be allowed?
-def testShareConflict2(t, env):
- """OPEN with deny=write when don't have write permissions
-
- FLAGS: open all
- DEPEND: MKFILE MODE
- CODE: OPEN19
- """
- c1 = env.c1
- c1.init_connection()
- c1.create_confirm(t.code, attrs={FATTR4_MODE:0644},
- access=OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_READ,
- deny=OPEN4_SHARE_DENY_NONE)
- c2 = env.c2
- c2.init_connection()
- res = c2.open_file(t.code, access=OPEN4_SHARE_ACCESS_READ,
- deny=OPEN4_SHARE_DENY_WRITE)
- check(res, NFS4ERR_ACCESS,
- "Trying to deny write permissions to others when "
- "don't have write permissions")
-
def testFailedOpen(t, env):
"""MULTIPLE: failed open should not mess up other clients' filehandles
--
1.7.0.4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-17 0:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-17 0:37 [PATCH 1/2] TESTS: Allow server to reject commits with large offsets J. Bruce Fields
2010-08-17 0:38 ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2010-08-17 0:45 ` [PATCH 2/2] remove open share mode file permission check J. Bruce Fields
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100817003802.GE7764@fieldses.org \
--to=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=iisaman@umich.edu \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).