tcon torture test

[Andrew Bartlett]

On Sun, 2003-03-30 at 12:36, Richard Sharpe wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Mar 2003 tridge at samba.org wrote:
> 
> > > If two SessionSetups are sent, each resulting in a separate [V]UID, then
> > > does Windows apply correct restrictions to each or does it allow the greater
> > > set of permissions?  That is:
> > 
> > The question doesn't really make sense for SMBwriteX. It is similar to
> > the way write() works in posix - a open file handle can be used in any
> > security context, it doesn't matter what euid you change to before
> > calling write()
> 
> Right. The security checking is done at open time. However, I imagine that 
> there are problems over NFS. There sure are for another FS I can name 
> where read/write permission checking is deferred until reading/writing 
> time.

It turns out that Win2003 RC2 does check these...

Andrew Bartlett

-- 
Andrew Bartlett                                 abartlet at pcug.org.au
Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team  abartlet at samba.org
Student Network Administrator, Hawker College   abartlet at hawkerc.net
http://samba.org     http://build.samba.org     http://hawkerc.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20030330/8a92db0d/attachment.bin