Chmod overiding default ACLs.


 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Operating Systems Linux Red Hat Chmod overiding default ACLs.
# 1  
Old 08-02-2013
Chmod overiding default ACLs.

Afternoon all,

This should be a simple task.

I have set up default acls on a directory to allow user user1 to read it. This directory is owned by root:root.

Code:
setfacl -d -m u:user1:rx /directory

I also did via the group.

This works fine, new files made by root are readable.

Code:
getfacl /directory supports this:
 
...
default:user:user1:r-x
...
default:group:user1:r-x

However, the process that is writing new files is writing them as 700, and this user cannot read those files.

Code:
getfacl /directory/newfile gives:
 
#file: newfile
#owner: root
#group: root
user::rwx
user:user1:r-x                           #effective:---
group::r-x                                 #effective---
group:user1:r-x                         #effective----
mask::r-x
other::r-x

This occurs also if you create a file that is readable, then chmod 700.

Can some explain the effective rights for me and why its overiding the acls where the files are either chmod 700, or written as 700 by the process that is writing them? I know this is the correct behaviour, I am just trying to understand why this is.

Cheers,
Si Smilie
# 2  
Old 08-06-2013
Have you tried setting the umask?
# 3  
Old 08-07-2013
I have the same on AIX (slightly different commands) and that is just how it works. The safest way to change such files is by editing the ACL. What you are saying with your chmod is "Overwrite the security permissions with RWX --- ---" so that's what it does. Everything else is invalidated.

perhaps you may have more success with the other format of chmod where you specifically grant/revoke accesses:-
Code:
chmod u+r file
chmod u+w file
chmod u+x file
chmod g-r file
chmod g-w file
chmod g-x file
chmod o-r file
chmod o-w file
chmod o-x file

I've never tried this, and you may be able to combine them, but the basically system is doing what you ask it to.




I hope that this helps

Robin
Liverpool/Blackburn
UK
# 4  
Old 08-07-2013
Sorry, should have stated, I have no control over what is changing the files. They are written by a process nightly, the acls are to allow auditing via splunk. But new files are no taking the default ACL as they are being written as 700, or at least written as something else and the chmodded to 700. Eitherway, the default ACLs set on that directory are not working for the new files, and splunk can cannot read the new files, but can on everything else in the directory. I can fix with cron, but it doesn't seem very elegant :-)
# 5  
Old 08-07-2013
As far as I recall, using POSIX commands such as chmod overwrite any previous ACLs on a file and create a new ACL with entries only for owner, group and everyone.
Login or Register to Ask a Question

Previous Thread | Next Thread

9 More Discussions You Might Find Interesting

1. AIX

Unable to set ACLs on sulog - need to grant read permission to a normal user on AIX 6.1

Hi, I need to grant read permission to a normal user on sulog file on AIX 6.1. As root I did acledit sulog and aclget shows "extended permissions" as "enabled" and normal user "splunk" has read permissions. When I try to access sulog as splunk user it won't allow and aclget for splunk user... (6 Replies)
Discussion started by: prvnrk
6 Replies

2. Red Hat

Is there limit on number of ACLs' per directory in Redhat

I work on a distribution application on Linux which generates bulk reference data extract feeds and stores them on a Linux server. I have several consumer applications access the files stored on this Linux server using FTPS protocol. However in order for consumer applications to have access to... (2 Replies)
Discussion started by: waavman
2 Replies

3. Red Hat

ACLs - How can i create new executable files

Hello experts, I would like to know if is possible to create a default acl rule to a directory. in this directory all files created should have executable permissions by the group IT. i tried setfacl -m d:g:it:rwx /files tried to change the mask setfacl -m m::rwx /files but i still... (3 Replies)
Discussion started by: berveglieri
3 Replies

4. UNIX for Advanced & Expert Users

Does regular Linux installation in fact uses any ACLs in any file/dir?

Hi everybody As the title says I wonder if the usual (in my case Ubuntu 14.04 LTS) linux installation root does in fact uses any of the ACLs possible extensions in any of its files/dirs I ask this because I usually use tar to backup the entire root (in offline) with a command like this (root... (2 Replies)
Discussion started by: man-walking
2 Replies

5. Solaris

ZFS ACLS and vim

Hi, Does anyone know a way of making vim preserve ZFS NFSv4 ACLS? Without disabling file backups in vim that is. Thanks in advanced. (10 Replies)
Discussion started by: akame
10 Replies

6. Emergency UNIX and Linux Support

Squid acls

Hi guys, There is a line in squid default configuration: # Deny CONNECT to other than secure SSL ports http_access deny CONNECT !SSL_ports acls are applied from top down, so CONNECT acl will deny access to all non SSL and SSL ports. I mean it never reaches the second access rule. (0 Replies)
Discussion started by: majid.merkava
0 Replies

7. UNIX and Linux Applications

What is the difference between chmod in solaris and chmod in Linux?

i think it is the same in both... Iam i right? (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: sumaiya
1 Replies

8. UNIX for Advanced & Expert Users

changing UGO to ACLs on a file

Hello, I have a directory and a list of files in it on which I'd like to set ACLs and quota. To set ACLs regarding the UGO rights set at the moment, I haven't found any other way than grabbing the UGO rights set on the file with a shell cut command and then applying setfacl commands to that... (2 Replies)
Discussion started by: davchris
2 Replies

9. UNIX for Dummies Questions & Answers

chmod...

Hey everyone, I was wondering if there was a quicker way to chmod a lot of files than doing what im currently doing. At the moment, im doing chmod 777 *filename* - but I have a lot of files, sub-directories, sub-files etc etc. And at the moment I see I have to chmod every single file... (3 Replies)
Discussion started by: mo0ness
3 Replies
Login or Register to Ask a Question