On 12/08/2009 05:06 PM, John Dennis wrote:
On 12/08/2009 06:13 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le Lun 7 décembre 2009 23:21, John Dennis a écrit :
>> * Should rpmlint really be emitting warnings and errors for items not in
>> the guidelines? (not just about file/directory but a number of other
>> issues which frankly seems dubious). If rpmlint and the guidelines are
>> divergent then should rpmlint be a recommended tool during package
> rpmlint is very convenient but
> 1. has been known to emit stupid warnings in the past (for example,
> months it failed *any* spec file with UTF-8 inside, when UTF-8 was a
> choice, and while FPC had not asked for any filtering)
> 2. has refused to include checks for some Fedora packaging guidelines
> they were "distro specific" (ie the maintainer disagreed with FPC;
> today the
> same checks are performed by Debian's lintian on .debs, but rpmlint still
> ignores them)
> I don't think this can resolved unless the rpmlint maintainer agrees
> to pay
> more attention to Fedora packaging guidelines. Right now rpmlint is
> rpmlint maintainer feels is right. It may align or not with our own
O.K. you and few others have answered one of my questions, rpmlint is
divorced from our guidelines.
But I had another question, specifically about file permissions and if
there were guidelines. The question is in the context of system
services. I've looked at the file ownership and permissions under /etc
and /var/log and there doesn't seem to be a lot of consistency.
My personal viewpoint is that for system services normal users should
not be able to read configuration files and logs. Files/directories
should have uid of root (0) and a gid belonging to the special daemon
user associated with the service (which implicitly includes a special
daemon group). Permissions should be set up to allow only root and the
daemon user access to read and write files and search directories for
that service. Normal users (e.g. users who are neither root nor in the
daemon special group) should not be given read permission on files nor
execute permission on directories. In other words the mode 755 is not
correct for files owned by system services, it should be either 770 or
750 depending on the file/directory. Rpmlint is recommending 775 for
everything as far as I can tell and I think is wrong. Is there a
consensus on file permissions for "system" packages?
The unspoken rule
sofar has been:
Unless a file contains "confident"/"security relevant" information it
should be set 755. If it contains such infos it should not be set 755.
This avoids user-side~, packager~ confusion and technical problems
related to files which are required to be system-wide readable.
Would others agree
with the basic philosophy I outlined or do you take issue with it?
No, I don't,
for the reasons outlined above.
I've never seen a recommendation written on this topic, it seems to be
anecdotal, historical and inconsistent rather than prescribed.
It's not that
inconsistant as you seem to presume :-=)