Having had a bit more time to think on this (also more caffine), I still think a mask of 0666 with sysopen is less than desirable for a couple of reasons:
- what if your umask is not set sanely?
- what if your umask changes?
If you don't supply a mask to sysopen it will just create the file and apply the umask at create time. Personally, I think paranoia is good and chmoding the file immediately after the create to most restricted mode possible while still making the file available to those processes and/or users that need to access the file is the best policy.
CC
In reply to Re: Re: Setting permissions as text file is created
by coec
in thread Setting permissions as text file is created
by Hissingsid
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |