Closed
Bug 254303
Opened 21 years ago
Closed 21 years ago
1.7.2 tar.gz package has wrong permissions
Categories
(SeaMonkey :: Installer, defect)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
People
(Reporter: hm, Assigned: dbaron)
References
Details
(Keywords: fixed-aviary1.0, fixed1.7.5, Whiteboard: [patch]fixed1.7.3)
Attachments
(2 files, 1 obsolete file)
5.15 KB,
patch
|
bryner
:
review+
asa
:
approval-aviary+
mkaply
:
approval1.7.5+
asa
:
approval1.8a3+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
1.10 KB,
patch
|
bryner
:
review+
bryner
:
superreview+
asa
:
approval-aviary+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803 MultiZilla/1.6.4.0b
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803 MultiZilla/1.6.4.0b
Just installed the tar.gz package. The package unpacks as follows:
nathan:/usr/local # l mozilla/
insgesamt 5080
drwxrwxrwx 12 500 500 4096 2004-08-04 19:16 ./
drwxr-xr-x 20 root root 4096 2004-08-04 19:19 ../
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 0 2004-08-04 19:16 .autoreg
-rw-rw-rw- 1 500 500 30869 1999-10-06 04:14 LICENSE
-rw-rw-rw- 1 500 500 9542 2004-03-13 07:25 README.txt
-rwxrwxrwx 1 500 500 20424 2004-08-03 22:07 TestGtkEmbed*
-rw-rw-rw- 1 500 500 208 2002-08-02 00:59 bloaturls.txt
drwxrwxr-x 22 500 500 4096 2004-08-04 19:16 chrome/
drwxrwxrwx 4 500 500 8192 2004-08-04 19:16 components/
drwxrwxrwx 8 500 500 87 2004-08-03 21:51 defaults/
-rwxrwxrwx 1 500 500 5460 2004-08-03 22:07 dirver*
-rwxrwxrwx 1 500 500 14552 2004-08-03 22:07 elf-dynstr-gc*
drwxrwxrwx 2 500 500 83 2004-08-03 18:59 greprefs/
etc. etc. i.e. most dirs and files are world writable and belong to a non-root
user. As a workaround, one can
chmod -R go-w mozilla
chown -R root.root mozilla
Please correct this problem - it imposes a security risk for many non-savvy users.
Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
There's also bug 254309 for Firefox.
I couldn't find any earlier bugs to dupe this against, that's hard to believe. :P
Comment 2•21 years ago
|
||
bug 231083 is for the installer
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•21 years ago
|
||
Um, what's your umask, and what version of tar are you using? My version of tar
(1.13.25) respects my umask when extracting, as it should. I don't think this
is a problem in our tar.gz file.
Comment 4•21 years ago
|
||
Of course this is a bug in your tarball, just do
$ tar xvfpz mozilla mozilla-i686-pc-linux-gnu-1.7.2-installer.tar.gz
$ ls -al mozilla/
So unpacking as a normal user can get you these permissions as well (you just
have to preserve the original permissions) or unpack as root (I bet there many
out there who do this).
Only difference is that unpacking as root will give you some high UID/GID for
the files while unpacking as a user gives you the UID/GID of your user.
Fix for this is simple: Repackage the tarball with correct permissions, maybe
even UID/GID 0 to avoid any confusion/errors.
Reporter | ||
Comment 5•21 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #3)
> Um, what's your umask, and what version of tar are you using? My version of tar
> (1.13.25) respects my umask when extracting, as it should. I don't think this
> is a problem in our tar.gz file.
I unpacked the file as root, and the standard umask is 022. tar is 1.13.25 like
yours.
Just look at the tar package using tar ztvf, and you see what I mean. The
package has been built like this to begin with, which it should not be.
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•21 years ago
|
||
If you're using -p as one of the options to tar, you're explicitly requesting
that your umask be ignored.
Original reporter: were you using -p as well?
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•21 years ago
|
||
I agree about the ownership, though. We should probably run tar with --owner=0
--group=0. But I'm really not sure about running with --mode="o-w" or
--mode="go-w". And while we're there, should we use --numeric-owner?
For the record, what |info tar| says about -p is:
`--preserve-permissions'
`--same-permissions'
`-p'
When `tar' is extracting an archive, it normally subtracts the
users' umask from the permissions specified in the archive and
uses that number as the permissions to create the destination
file. Specifying this option instructs `tar' that it should use
the permissions directly from the archive. *Note Writing::.
Reporter | ||
Comment 8•21 years ago
|
||
(In reply to comment #7)
> I agree about the ownership, though. We should probably run tar with --owner=0
> --group=0. But I'm really not sure about running with --mode="o-w" or
> --mode="go-w". And while we're there, should we use --numeric-owner?
I was using tar zxvf, nothing else. Yes I _could_ use -p but that doesn't change
anything because I was unpacking as root which preserves everything to begin
with. I just re-tried with tar zxpvf as root, umask 0022:
hm@nathan:/tmp> l mozilla
insgesamt 5080
drwxrwxrwx 12 hm users 4096 2004-08-03 22:07 ./
drwxrwxrwt 55 root root 12288 2004-08-05 12:38 ../
-rw-rw-rw- 1 hm users 30869 1999-10-06 04:14 LICENSE
-rw-rw-rw- 1 hm users 9542 2004-03-13 07:25 README.txt
-rwxrwxrwx 1 hm users 20424 2004-08-03 22:07 TestGtkEmbed*
-rw-rw-rw- 1 hm users 208 2002-08-02 00:59 bloaturls.txt
drwxrwxr-x 21 hm users 4096 2004-08-03 21:52 chrome/
drwxrwxrwx 4 hm users 8192 2004-08-03 22:07 components/
drwxrwxrwx 8 hm users 87 2004-08-03 21:51 defaults/
-rwxrwxrwx 1 hm users 5460 2004-08-03 22:07 dirver*
...
It would be the best solution to add chmod, chown to the Makefile section that
builds the tar archive. Everything else burdens non-savvy users. Please. And
while you're at it, re-check the other packaging mechanisms...
Assignee | ||
Comment 9•21 years ago
|
||
(untested)
Assignee | ||
Updated•21 years ago
|
Assignee: general → dbaron
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Ever confirmed: true
Whiteboard: [patch]
Assignee | ||
Comment 10•21 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 155499 [details] [diff] [review]
patch
This does what I expect. Any opinions on o-w or go-w would be appreciated.
Attachment #155499 -
Flags: review?(bryner)
Assignee | ||
Updated•21 years ago
|
Attachment #155499 -
Attachment description: possible patch → patch
Assignee | ||
Comment 11•21 years ago
|
||
Actually, I've decided on go-w. And the first segment in the deliver.pl
changes belongs to bug 231083.
Assignee | ||
Updated•21 years ago
|
Attachment #155499 -
Attachment is obsolete: true
Assignee | ||
Updated•21 years ago
|
Attachment #155499 -
Flags: review?(bryner)
Assignee | ||
Updated•21 years ago
|
Attachment #155731 -
Flags: review?(bryner)
Updated•21 years ago
|
Attachment #155731 -
Flags: review?(bryner) → review+
Assignee | ||
Updated•21 years ago
|
Attachment #155731 -
Flags: approval1.8a3?
Comment 12•21 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 155731 [details] [diff] [review]
patch
a=asa for 1.8a3.
Attachment #155731 -
Flags: approval1.8a3? → approval1.8a3+
Assignee | ||
Comment 13•21 years ago
|
||
Fix checked in to trunk, 2004-08-16 17:14 -0700.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 21 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Assignee | ||
Updated•21 years ago
|
Attachment #155731 -
Flags: approval1.7.3?
Comment 14•21 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 155731 [details] [diff] [review]
patch
a=mkaply for 1.7
Attachment #155731 -
Flags: approval1.7.3? → approval1.7.3+
Assignee | ||
Comment 15•21 years ago
|
||
Fix checked in to MOZILLA_1_7_BRANCH, 2004-08-17 13:24 -0700.
Keywords: fixed1.7
Assignee | ||
Updated•20 years ago
|
Attachment #155731 -
Flags: approval-aviary?
Assignee | ||
Updated•20 years ago
|
Keywords: fixed1.7 → fixed1.7.3
Assignee | ||
Comment 16•20 years ago
|
||
Fix checked in to MOZILLA_1_7_2_BRANCH, 2004-08-27 13:35 -0700.
Whiteboard: [patch] → [patch]fixed1.7.2+
Comment 17•20 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 155731 [details] [diff] [review]
patch
a=asa for aviary checkin.
Attachment #155731 -
Flags: approval-aviary? → approval-aviary+
Assignee | ||
Comment 18•20 years ago
|
||
Fix checked in to AVIARY_1_0_20040515_BRANCH, 2004-08-27 14:40 -0700.
Keywords: fixed-aviary1.0
Assignee | ||
Comment 19•20 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Updated•20 years ago
|
Attachment #157344 -
Flags: superreview?(bryner)
Attachment #157344 -
Flags: review?(bryner)
Updated•20 years ago
|
Attachment #157344 -
Flags: superreview?(bryner)
Attachment #157344 -
Flags: superreview+
Attachment #157344 -
Flags: review?(bryner)
Attachment #157344 -
Flags: review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 20•20 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 157344 [details] [diff] [review]
patch for firefox installer
Checked in to trunk, 2004-08-30 12:57 -0700.
Comment 21•20 years ago
|
||
*** Bug 254309 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Assignee | ||
Updated•20 years ago
|
Attachment #157344 -
Flags: approval-aviary?
Comment 22•20 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 157344 [details] [diff] [review]
patch for firefox installer
a=asa for branch checkin.
Attachment #157344 -
Flags: approval-aviary? → approval-aviary+
Assignee | ||
Comment 23•20 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 157344 [details] [diff] [review]
patch for firefox installer
Checked in to AVIARY_1_0_20040515_BRANCH, 2004-09-01 17:34 -0700.
Updated•20 years ago
|
Whiteboard: [patch]fixed1.7.2+ → [patch]fixed1.7.3
Updated•20 years ago
|
Product: Browser → Seamonkey
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•