*BSD News Article 83490


Return to BSD News archive

Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!btnet!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!usenet2.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!usenet1.news.uk.psi.net!uknet!uknet!newsfeed.ed.ac.uk!edcogsci!richard
From: richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin)
Subject: Re: Why chown(2) is privileged?
Message-ID: <E1AECn.3rG@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Organization: HCRC, University of Edinburgh
References: <847786081.259851@panacea.insight.co.za> <E0vMsx.Bp0@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <56r47r$3sr@uriah.heep.sax.de>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 19:33:58 GMT
Lines: 17

In article <56r47r$3sr@uriah.heep.sax.de> joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) writes:
>...and perhaps to prevent people from shooting in their feet.  Try
>unpacking a tar tape/file on a SysV where the files and directories
>are owned by root and are not writable by you

Well, it does have that effect, but if chown were allowed, the Right
Solution would be for tar to not chown each directory until *after*
writing all the files and subdirectories in it.  Of course, one cannot
expect System V to do this...

Alternatively it could just change any directories not owned by you
to be world-writable, or some similar hack.  But it's a problem with
tar, not chown.

-- Richard
-- 
"Nothing can stop me now... except microscopic germs"