[SCM] Samba Shared Repository - branch v3-3-test updated - release-3-2-0pre2-2911-g51b5364

[Volker Lendecke]

The branch, v3-3-test has been updated
       via  51b5364c2afb3a18df4bec2bc1624760ccc01676 (commit)
       via  daa9b056645a45edfb3a70e3536011ebe5678970 (commit)
      from  abe1bed665ad8d1dbf9177dcbb9344b25df9594c (commit)

http://gitweb.samba.org/?p=samba.git;a=shortlog;h=v3-3-test


- Log -----------------------------------------------------------------
commit 51b5364c2afb3a18df4bec2bc1624760ccc01676
Author: Volker Lendecke <vl at samba.org>
Date:   Tue Jun 17 16:22:43 2008 +0200

    RWX on a file does not imply DELETE access
    
    Without this the changed checks in can_delete_file_in_directory give DELETE
    access where there is none. So we can end up granting the ntcreate&x preparing
    the unlink where we should not, which leads to a NT_STATUS_ACCESS_DENIED at
    close time later, which in turn does *not* give the access denied error message
    in the Windows GUI.
    
    can_delete_file_in_directory will grant access now by looking at the directory
    permissions.

commit daa9b056645a45edfb3a70e3536011ebe5678970
Author: Volker Lendecke <vl at samba.org>
Date:   Thu Jun 19 14:53:46 2008 +0200

    Fix checks in can_delete_file_in_directory()
    
    With at least NFSv4 ACLs around the write permission for the owner is a bogus
    check if we can delete a file in a directory. Like in Windows, there are two
    ways which can grant us such: First, the DELETE permission on the file itself,
    or if that does not help, the DELETE_CHILD permission on the directory. It
    might be a bit more code that runs, but essentially we should end up with the
    same set of syscalls in the non-acl case.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary of changes:
 source/smbd/file_access.c |   21 +++++++++++++++------
 source/smbd/posix_acls.c  |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)


Changeset truncated at 500 lines:

diff --git a/source/smbd/file_access.c b/source/smbd/file_access.c
index 0552a16..e61a8c3 100644
--- a/source/smbd/file_access.c
+++ b/source/smbd/file_access.c
@@ -87,11 +87,6 @@ bool can_delete_file_in_directory(connection_struct *conn, const char *fname)
 		return True;
 	}
 
-	/* Check primary owner write access. */
-	if (conn->server_info->uid == sbuf.st_uid) {
-		return (sbuf.st_mode & S_IWUSR) ? True : False;
-	}
-
 #ifdef S_ISVTX
 	/* sticky bit means delete only by owner or root. */
 	if (sbuf.st_mode & S_ISVTX) {
@@ -117,7 +112,21 @@ bool can_delete_file_in_directory(connection_struct *conn, const char *fname)
 
 	/* now for ACL checks */
 
-	return can_access_file_acl(conn, dname, FILE_WRITE_DATA);
+	/*
+	 * There's two ways to get the permission to delete a file: First by
+	 * having the DELETE bit on the file itself and second if that does
+	 * not help, by the DELETE_CHILD bit on the containing directory.
+	 *
+	 * Here we check the other way round because with just posix
+	 * permissions looking at the file itself will never grant DELETE, so
+	 * by looking at the directory first we save one get_acl call.
+	 */
+
+	if (can_access_file_acl(conn, dname, FILE_DELETE_CHILD)) {
+		return true;
+	}
+
+	return can_access_file_acl(conn, fname, DELETE_ACCESS);
 }
 
 /****************************************************************************
diff --git a/source/smbd/posix_acls.c b/source/smbd/posix_acls.c
index b83e3b6..e92a263 100644
--- a/source/smbd/posix_acls.c
+++ b/source/smbd/posix_acls.c
@@ -904,7 +904,7 @@ static SEC_ACCESS map_canon_ace_perms(int snum,
 		if (directory_ace) {
 			nt_mask = UNIX_DIRECTORY_ACCESS_RWX;
 		} else {
-			nt_mask = UNIX_ACCESS_RWX;
+			nt_mask = (UNIX_ACCESS_RWX & ~DELETE_ACCESS);
 		}
 	} else if ((perms & ALL_ACE_PERMS) == (mode_t)0) {
 		/*


-- 
Samba Shared Repository