From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bengt Richter Subject: bug#40405: System log files are world readable Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2020 02:49:58 +0200 Message-ID: <20200407004958.GA8760@LionPure> References: <87v9mg1zbt.fsf@GlaDOS.home> <874ktxh99k.fsf@gnu.org> <87blo4clpp.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Bengt Richter Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60084) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jLcSH-0001NI-AX for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 20:51:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jLcSF-0007sM-Dd for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 20:51:05 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:37846) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jLcSD-0007rc-Q7 for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 20:51:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jLcSD-0002Xm-MN for bug-guix@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 20:51:01 -0400 Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-Message-ID: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87blo4clpp.fsf@gnu.org> List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sender: "bug-Guix" To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: 40405@debbugs.gnu.org, Diego Nicola Barbato Hi Ludo, On +2020-04-07 00:07:14 +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Hi, > > Ludovic Courtès skribis: > > > In the meantime, the patch below fixes the syslogd problem. Also > > attached is a patch for the accounting database, though that one is > > questionable. > > I pushed the syslog bits along with a test as commit > d7113bb655ff80a868a9e624c913f9d23e6c63ad. (I think already > world-readable files will remain world-readable though?) > Could build daemons do some kind of maintenance rebuild to chmod them? And maybe be scheduled to monitor new files for other mistakes as well? Meanwhile, could a superuser chmod them without affecting hashes? (curious as to whether permission bits escape hashing). > The main remaining issue here is log files created by > ‘fork+exec-command’. We’ll have to address that in the Shepherd proper, > I think. > > Ludo’. > > > -- Regards, Bengt Richter