Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

rpmlint check for ghost files without %attr() #878

Open
darix opened this issue Jun 1, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

rpmlint check for ghost files without %attr() #878

darix opened this issue Jun 1, 2022 · 4 comments

Comments

@darix
Copy link
Contributor

darix commented Jun 1, 2022

having all permissions bits set to 0 should be rarely a valid case. rpmlint should warn packagers if they forgot to set the mode.

and in combination with systemd-tmpfiles it should ideally check that the mode is the same as in the tmpfiles.d config.

This mostlikely happens if you %ghost non existing files, which more recent rpm allows.

@marxin
Copy link
Contributor

marxin commented Jun 15, 2022

@mgerstner What do you think about it? Can you please somehow include it to a check?

@mgerstner
Copy link
Contributor

I don't think that this is a security related topic. A file with a mode of 0 is pretty safe ...

So I would say it is more regular quality asszrabce that could go into the mainline rpmlint checks.

Coupling this with a check of systemd-tmpfiles contents could become tricky / costly is my first impression. The check would need to lookup systemd-tmpfiles configuration files shipped in the same package (if it even is in the same package) and then compare its contents against the paths of all other files in the package.

@darix
Copy link
Contributor Author

darix commented Apr 30, 2024

@danigm
Copy link
Member

danigm commented May 3, 2024

I've just created a PR with a new check to warn about files without permissions, what do you think about this?
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpmlint/pull/1230/files

danigm added a commit to danigm/rpmlint that referenced this issue May 3, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants