Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #174429
| From | Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.user |
| Subject | Re: parted is ALMOST suitable |
| Date | 2016-11-09 17:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sBDBM-18k-33@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (5 earlier) <sBwJX-4WR-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <sBy94-5YV-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <sByiK-62n-29@gated-at.bofh.it> <sByC6-69v-35@gated-at.bofh.it> <sByVr-6vX-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Wed 09 Nov 2016 at 12:01:10 +0100, tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 10:45:52AM +0000, Brian wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > I hope cfdisk is an acceptable alternative to gparted, which is not on
> > my system. 'fakeroot /sbin/cfdisk' gives "cfdisk: cannot open /dev/sda:
> > Permission denied".
>
> We are talking past each other, I think.
>
> The above result is to be expected. I'm perfectly OK with that.
> You'd get that wih or without fakeroot (it doesn't convey powers
> to you you don't have. That feat would imply a gaping security
> hole in Linux. There are some, but the most obvious have been
> covered -- hopefully! long ago.
>
> The point Stefan (and me) are trying to make is that *the application
> has no business in checking user permissions*, and parted is doing
> exactly that ("am I root?"). It's something to be left to the OS
> (try to open the device and catch an EACCESS error; translate that
> for the user. That's what cfdisk above *is* doing, and I'm fine
> with that!
>
> *If* you happen to have read/write access to a device/file [1], then
> cfdisk would let you just go ahead (right behaviour), while gparted
> would stop you ("nyah nyah you aren' root" -- *wrong*).
>
> [1] Stefan and me have given examples where that would make sense.
#439409 was filed in 2007 and in the context of repartiting an external
device. In 2011 the question was asked:
> Are you sure that you can simply "cat </dev/random >/dev/sdg" on
> your GNU/Linux distribution?
To which the answer was:
> Huh? Of course, I"m sure.
If the question had been asked after April 2014 and the release of udev
204-9 the answer would (or should) have been "no". The command can be
tried on Jessie. "Permission denied" is the result. This makes it
impossible for a user to cat a Debian ISO to a USB stick. That's also
the subject of a bug report. But nothing to do with gparted.
Granted that gparted should not be checking user permissions and there
is a case for having it stop doing so. However, ceasing to check if the
user is UID 0 doesn't get him anywhere (with an external device) unless
he or gparted can sneak past udev. A disk image as a file is a different
matter.
--
Brian.
Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 13:20 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Felipe Salvador <felipe.salvador@gmail.com> - 2016-11-07 13:30 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 13:40 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 14:00 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 14:20 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 15:00 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 15:50 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 16:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-11-07 17:30 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Felipe Salvador <felipe.salvador@gmail.com> - 2016-11-07 15:30 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-11-07 16:20 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Aldo Maggi <aldomaggi@katamail.com> - 2016-11-07 18:20 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Felipe Salvador <felipe.salvador@gmail.com> - 2016-11-07 19:00 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-11-08 19:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Glenn English <ghe2001@gmail.com> - 2016-11-08 19:40 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2016-11-08 21:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-08 21:50 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2016-11-09 00:20 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 18:40 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-09 21:40 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 21:50 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-09 22:20 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-09 09:50 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 11:20 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-09 11:30 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 11:50 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-09 12:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 17:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-09 15:20 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 20:50 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-09 21:40 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 21:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-11-10 01:20 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-10 10:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-09 19:30 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-09 21:40 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2016-11-08 22:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-11-09 16:00 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-09 09:40 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 16:30 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-07 17:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Felipe Salvador <felipe.salvador@gmail.com> - 2016-11-07 18:50 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-07 20:20 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2016-11-08 00:50 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-08 01:40 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Michael Lange <klappnase@freenet.de> - 2016-11-08 03:50 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-08 12:00 +0100
Correction - Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-08 12:20 +0100
Re: Correction - Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-08 20:30 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-11-08 13:50 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-08 20:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Frank <zuiderduin@gmx.com> - 2016-11-07 13:30 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Darac Marjal <mailinglist@darac.org.uk> - 2016-11-07 13:40 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 13:50 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 14:30 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 15:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 15:20 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-11-07 15:30 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 15:40 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-07 17:00 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-11-07 17:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2016-11-07 17:20 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 15:30 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2016-11-07 15:40 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 16:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2016-11-07 18:00 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-08 10:20 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-11-07 21:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-08 01:00 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> - 2016-11-08 12:20 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-11-11 15:40 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-11 17:30 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2016-11-11 18:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2016-11-11 18:40 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2016-11-07 15:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2016-11-07 15:10 +0100
Re: parted is ALMOST suitable rhkramer@gmail.com - 2016-11-07 15:00 +0100
csiph-web