SUMMARY: cifs share umask for a unix qtree

From: Roy McMorran (mcmorran@mdibl.org)
Date: Wed May 20 2009 - 09:28:41 EDT

  • Next message: Ken Williams: "SMVI "Operation timed out" during queice / vmware-level snapshot"

    Ed Wilts wrote:

    > Use the dir_umask option to set directory umasks.

    Thanks to Ed, and also to Stetson Webster, Darren Dunham and Ned Harvey
    for your replies.

    Cheers,
    -r

    Roy McMorran wrote:
    > I have a qtree that's shared among NFS and CIFS clients. The security
    > style is Unix.
    >
    > If I set the umask to be 002, ie:
    >
    > filer> cifs shares -change myshare -umask 2
    >
    > Then the files created in the share via CIFS still have the *execute
    > bits set*:
    >
    > $ ls -al test.txt
    > -rwxrwxr-x 1 user group 4 May 19 16:41 test.txt
    >
    > That's not what I want; none of these files should really be executable.
    >
    > I have read at least one thread in the list archives that suggest
    > using a umask of 113, ie:
    >
    > filer> cifs shares -change myshare -umask 113
    >
    > This seems sketchy, but I gave it a try. Well, it works for files,
    > but also omits the execute bits from newly-created *directories*:
    >
    > $ ls -ald test*
    > -rwxrwxr-x 1 user group 4 May 19 16:41 test.txt
    > -rw-rw-r-- 1 user group 4 May 19 16:43 test2.txt
    > drw-rw-r-- 2 user group 4096 May 19 16:48 test
    >
    > And directories don't work so well in that case!
    >
    > Am I missing something? Why should it not behave like the Unix umask
    > command (with respect to directories)?
    >
    > OnTap 7.2.5 if it matters.
    >
    > Thanks,
    > 

    -- 
Roy McMorran
Systems Administrator
MDI Biological Laboratory
mcmorran@mdibl.org

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed May 20 2009 - 09:46:43 EDT