Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 28 Jun 2013 10:10:02 +0200
From:      ASV <asv@inhio.eu>
To:        "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@berklix.com>
Cc:        Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de>, freebsd-questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: A very 'trivial' question about /root
Message-ID:  <1372407002.6831.34.camel@blackfriar.inhio.eu>
In-Reply-To: <201306272347.r5RNlpgG096631@fire.js.berklix.net>
References:  <201306272347.r5RNlpgG096631@fire.js.berklix.net>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
Hi Julian,
you played Devil's advocate well actually as I don't know which idea
would be more audacious, letting httpd access files from your root dir
or exporting /root via nfs. :)
Both of them sound more like a lab scenario than a real one.

I understand that launching a "chmod 700 /root" it's a matter of
something between 1 and 3 seconds. I do also understand that I had /root
closed for long time and never had the need to set permissions back
loose and this triggered my point.
Why is it that open? :)


On Fri, 2013-06-28 at 01:47 +0200, Julian H. Stacey wrote:
> Hi, Reference:
> > From:		ASV <asv@inhio.eu> 
> > Date:		Thu, 27 Jun 2013 21:39:20 +0200 
> 
> ASV wrote:
> > Thanks for your reply Polytropon,
> > 
> > I'm using FreeBSD since few years already and I'm kind of aware of the
> > "dynamics" related to permissions, many of them are common to many
> > Unices.
> > I agree that the installer doesn't put anything secret but as a home dir
> > for the root user it's highly likely that something not intended to be
> > publicly readable will end up there soon after the installation.
> > Which IMHO it's true also for any other user homedir which gets created
> > by default using a pretty relaxed umask 022, but that seems to be the
> > default on probably any other UNIX like system I've put my hands on
> > AFAIR. 
> > 
> > Don't get me wrong, since I use FreeBSD I'm just in love with it. Mine
> > is just a concern about these permission defaults which look to me a bit
> > too relaxed and cannot find yet a reason why not to restrict it.
> > After all I believe having good default settings may make the difference
> > in some circumstances and/or save time.
> > 
> > On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 04:58 +0200, Polytropon wrote:
> > > On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 23:34:41 +0200, ASV wrote:
> > > > There's any reason (and should be a fairly good one) why the /root
> > > > directory permissions by default are set to 755 (for sure on releases
> > > > 8.0/8.1/9.0/9.1)????
> > > 
> > > This is the default permission for user directories, as root
> > > is considered a user in this (special) case, and /root is its
> > > home directory. The installer does not put anything "secret"
> > > in there, but _you_ might, so there should be no issue changing
> > > it to a more restricted access permission.
> > > 
> > > Hint: When a directory is r-x for "other", then it will be
> > > indexed by the locate periodic job, so users could use the
> > > locate command (and also find) to look what's in there. If
> > > this is not desired, change to rwx/---/---, or rwx/r-x/---
> > > if you want to allow (trusted) users of the "wheel" group
> > > to read and execute stuff from that directory (maybe homemade
> > > admin scripts in /root/bin that should not be "public").
> > > 
> > > There are few things that touch /root content. System updating
> > > might be one of them, but as it is typically run as root (and
> > > even in SUM), restrictive permissions above the default are
> > > no problem.
> > > 
> > > To summarize the answer for your question: It's just the default. :-)
> 
> I'll play Devil's advocate for a moment ;-)
> 
>   One reason not to tighten ~root is because one might want
>   ~root/httpuserfile to be readable by httpd to access the crypted
>   passwords of locked web page. ... ;-)
> 
> No not really, that's perverted, I wouldn't reccomend an
> http://localhost/~root/ regardless of password locked pages or not.
> 
> But it shows how lateral head scratching might be
> appropriate before removing read perms on ~root/ .
> 
> { A bit like wrong ownership on / can surprisingly kill AMD NFS
> access } ... some unexpected constraints can take some thinking
> through, It might be quickest for a number of us to just try chmod
> 700 ~root for a while & see if we get trouble.
> 
> Cheers,
> Julian





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1372407002.6831.34.camel>