From: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2022 21:27:42 GMT
Subject: Re: safe.directory and ACLs
Message-ID: <Y2LgzmTvElmRTsoe@tapette.crustytoothpaste.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAJyRyRo7oVAfLx8MONO=Y8KhLvL+tJgDTbCUezR1AFa73R5pbw@mail.gmail.com>

On 2022-11-02 at 15:18:25, John Soo wrote:
> Hello git!
> 
> We have some build processes that would like access to repos in /home
> directories that are 0700. We had done this already:
> 
> $ setfacl --recursive --modify group:<build users
> group>:r-X,default:group:<build users group>:r-X /home
> 
> Should this ACL be enough to consider the repos "owned" by the build
> users? Should *any* ACL be enough to consider the repos "owned" by the
> build users?
> 
> Currently:
> $ sudo -u <build user> git config --get safe.directory
> $ sudo -u <build user> git -C /home/<non build user>/repo rev-parse HEAD
> fatal: unsafe repository ('/home/<non build user>/repo' is owned by
> someone else)
> To add an exception for this directory, call:
> 
>         git config --global --add safe.directory /home/<non build user>

No, the permissions of a repository, whether standard Unix permissions
or ACLs, are not relevant to ownership.  The question here is whether
the owner of the .git directory (that is, the value of the `st_uid`
field when calling lstat(2) on it) is equal to the effective user ID.

When you the path in `ls`, you can see the owner and group of the file
specified, and that owner is what matters here.
-- 
brian m. carlson (he/him or they/them)
Toronto, Ontario, CA