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

Default umask (permissions) is not applied #352

Open
simonbuchan opened this Issue May 12, 2016 · 23 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
@simonbuchan

simonbuchan commented May 12, 2016

Reference: http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/understanding-linux-unix-umask-value-usage.html

My current install has this in /etc/profile:

# The default umask is now handled by pam_umask.
# See pam_umask(8) and /etc/login.defs.

And, indeed /etc/profile has UMASK> > 022, but:

simon@QOF:~$ umask
0000

The effect of this is that new files are created with 666 and dirs with 777 permissions:

simon@QOF:~$ touch file
simon@QOF:~$ mkdir dir
simon@QOF:~$ ll -d file dir
drwxrwxrwx 2 simon simon 0 May 12 22:54 dir/
-rw-rw-rw- 1 simon simon 0 May 12 22:54 file

This mostly isn't a real problem since UoW doesn't have to care about multiple users, it largely shows up as ls showing dirs with an ugly green background, but it could freak out some tools, similar to ssh wanting 600 on your private keys.

Simplest fix would probably be to dump a umask 022 in /etc/profile, but it seems there's a bunch of stuff in that /etc/login.defs

Easy workaound is to add a umask to your ~/.bashrc

@simonbuchan

This comment has been minimized.

simonbuchan commented May 13, 2016

May be somewhat related to #167 , /etc/profile is supposed to be read if bash is a login shell - but even bash.exe --login doesn't seem to use pam_umask

@benhillis

This comment has been minimized.

Member

benhillis commented May 13, 2016

@simonbuchan Thanks for reporting this. I think there are a couple things going on here. I verified that when bash.exe --login is launched /bin/bash does read from /etc/profile. I dumped my default /etc/profile and noticed a comment that:

# The default umask is now handled by pam_umask.
# See pam_umask(8) and /etc/login.defs.

When you run "bash.exe --login" that translates into "/bin/bash --login". We don't run the /bin/login binary and I'm assuming that's what normally sets up pam_umask. Did you try adding a new umask to value to your /etc/profile? It should work (when using bash.exe --login).

@simonbuchan

This comment has been minimized.

simonbuchan commented May 13, 2016

Yep, umask in both /etc/profile and ~/.profile run with both bash.exe --login and bash -c "bash --login".
Interestingly, if I revert the umask command and do bash.exe -c "sudo login" then umask is 0002 - no idea where that is coming from!

@0xMF

This comment has been minimized.

0xMF commented May 26, 2016

Please ensure umask is never 0000 no matter how bash is started.

I understand users can set umask to saner defaults in their own bashrc files but it means whatever directories and files auto-installed by scripts after WSL setup and user first bash run till the bad umask was discovered now have to be changed to sane defaults. This is exacerbated in git-based repos because git will track the change of perms to saner defaults as a (needless) change thereby status of git repo becomes dirty which simply put is both: confusing and annoying.

@simonbuchan

This comment has been minimized.

simonbuchan commented May 26, 2016

@0xMF don't worry, git only tracks +x, and the .bashrc changes are mentioned as a workaround

@neurogenesis

This comment has been minimized.

neurogenesis commented Oct 16, 2016

This also causes problems for zsh (compinit/compaudit). If you use a tool like antigen the directory permissions will throw shell errors when compinit/compaudit (command completion) is loaded.

Essentially any tool that performs basic checking for "other" write/read permissions will fail.

For anyone else trying to use dropbox, careful with symlinks to the windows /mnt/c/.... You'll likely run into a lot of problems. Unfortunately, dropbox for linux doesn't work yet either (because of the /proc/vmstat issue: #1071 ).

This was referenced Oct 16, 2016

@zhangxj5

This comment has been minimized.

zhangxj5 commented Oct 23, 2016

Hello, It's very strange. If I run ./configure, I found that the Makefile in the dir and sub dir only has permission rw no x. So some middle product didn't output, ./configure is right, but can't do make.

It's a big problem.

@zhangxj5

This comment has been minimized.

zhangxj5 commented Oct 24, 2016

/usr/bin/m4: m4_esyscmd subprocess failed: Operation not permitted
/usr/bin/m4:configure.ac:489: cannot run command `./scripts/version.sh': Operation not permitted

@lilred

This comment has been minimized.

lilred commented Dec 1, 2016

I have put this in my ~/.profile in the meantime:

# Note: Bash on Windows does not currently apply umask properly.
if [ "$(umask)" = "0000" ]; then
>   umask 022
fi

@benhillis: if you have time to entertain my curiosity - is there a particular reason you don't run /bin/login?

@benhillis

This comment has been minimized.

Member

benhillis commented Dec 1, 2016

@lilred - good question. Historically there have been a couple of reasons. When we first released /bin/bash worked but other shells (zsh for example) didn't work very well and we didn't want users to set their default shell to something that didn't work and get into a bad state. There's also potential strangeness around running bash.exe and zsh being launched.

That being said, running login would actually make a lot of things simpler for us.  Currently our init daemon has to do many of the things that /bin/login normally does. We're doing some design for the next release of Windows and I'll take a look at this and see if it would make sense to potentially switch things over now.

If you'd like to play around with using login there's a way you can use it now.

lxrun.exe /setdefaultuser root
bash.exe -c "/bin/login -f username"

@lilred

This comment has been minimized.

lilred commented Dec 1, 2016

This is fantastic, thanks for the insight. I will change my Bash shortcut to this and report back if I hit any issues.

@simonbuchan

This comment has been minimized.

simonbuchan commented Dec 1, 2016

With /bin/login I do get umask returning 002, which is probably "good enough" to close this, but it's still not getting the "correct" default value 022 from /etc/login.defs line 151, which may be a thing.

Also it seems to start faster?!

@simonbuchan

This comment has been minimized.

simonbuchan commented Dec 1, 2016

One thing to be aware of is it doesn't extend PATH with the windows path.

@simonbuchan

This comment has been minimized.

simonbuchan commented Feb 15, 2017

@jackchammons Does closing this mean the default setup will now set a umask? /bin/login is not a default setup.

@jackchammons

This comment has been minimized.

Member

jackchammons commented Feb 15, 2017

The current behavior is expected. We will be reevaluating where umask gets set in an future release.

@hughbe

This comment has been minimized.

hughbe commented Mar 23, 2017

This is breaking unit tests for swift-llbuild, part of the Swift.org project:

$ umask 22
$ umask
0022
$ mkdir foo
$ ls -l
drwxrwxrwx 2 root root 0 Mar 23 16:47 foo

@therealkenc

This comment has been minimized.

Collaborator

therealkenc commented Mar 26, 2018

Cleaning up issues, and this one is in a weird undead state. Jack marked it as by-design and Sunil re-opened it. It can't be both. There are three paths forward I can see here:

(1) Deem the default umask of 0000 intended behaviour by fiat and this issue can be closed.

(2) Make WSL's reimagination of getty (interop) go through login like Ben mused. There is a work-around for this right now: wsl.exe sudo /bin/login -f me. You'll get a umask of 0002 by default, which is linux-behavior (if you ssh localhost on Real Linux you get the same umask by default).

(3) Lite version of (2), set the umask to 0002 or 0022 unilaterally in WSL init, and deem that intended behaviour by fiat.

This isn't really a discussion thread. It's either a feature request for (2) or (3), or should be closed as (1).

@simonbuchan

This comment has been minimized.

simonbuchan commented Mar 26, 2018

There's also the umask DriveFS interop that got added recently - does that have implications here?

@simonbuchan

This comment has been minimized.

simonbuchan commented Mar 26, 2018

I saw that it let you set a default umask too? Maybe default that to whatever this does?

@jean

This comment has been minimized.

jean commented Jul 15, 2018

I really can't see this being a "feature" 😟

@simonbuchan

This comment has been minimized.

simonbuchan commented Jul 15, 2018

I'm happy with anything from #352 (comment) (well, not happy with by design, but I get it)

The feature would be either implementing this one thing that real init does in some way, or switch to using real init somehow.

tikkss added a commit to tikkss/dotfiles that referenced this issue Aug 16, 2018

Fix default umask (permissions) is not applied on wsl
/etc/wsl.conf に umount の設定をしても、 WSL の umount
の設定には反映されない不具合がある。

マウントされた Windowsのフォルダやファイルの umount 設定は正常である。

回避策として、WSL 独自の config.fish に umount 設定を追加した。

Microsoft/WSL#352

PhilipDaniels pushed a commit to PhilipDaniels/dotfiles that referenced this issue Aug 21, 2018

On WSL, start dbus and set umask correctly.
See bug Microsoft/WSL#352 about umask
not being set (it is 0000) which results in directories having
ugo+rwx permissions which then results in ugly directory listings.

kodemeister added a commit to kodemeister/prezto that referenced this issue Sep 20, 2018

@sjackman

This comment has been minimized.

sjackman commented Nov 2, 2018

This issue is causing trouble when running the Linuxbrew/Homebrew package manager in WSL. I'd love to see the default umask set to 002.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment