Ever came across a case where cmod 777 was a valid solution

[Jamon Camisso]

On 12-03-09 12:43 PM, William Muriithi wrote:
> Afternoon,
> 
> Over time, I have came across cases where someone has "fixed" a
> problem or suggested changing file permission to 777 and have always
> ended up ranting about it.  That got me thinking today, could there be
> a solution that would genuinely need read, write and execute
> permission for user, group and others?  I sincerely can not think of
> any and wonder if any of us here have come across such a case.

Take a look at /tmp, /var/tmp, /run, /var/run, /var/lock and others.

Note the sticky bit is set on those directories, which allows global
access but prevents anyone but a file owner from deleting other user' files.

But yes, in general, 777 is a brute force approach to permissions where
a better solution likely exists e.g. figure out the uid/gid of a user or
daemon and alter permissions accordingly, and or make sure said user or
daemon is in the proper groups.

Jamon
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists