On 27.11.2018 10:41, Branko Čibej wrote: > On 26.11.2018 18:32, Pavel Goran wrote: >> Hello mailing list, >> >> I'm migrating a repository from an ancient Subversion installation: >> >> svn, version 1.6.17 (r1128011) >> compiled Jun 2 2011, 23:35:08 >> (on Windows) >> >> to a recent version: >> >> svn, version 1.11.0 (r1845130) >> compiled Oct 29 2018, 14:33:24 on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu >> (on NixOS Linux) >> >> And I'm encountering a regression in handling of the authz file by svnserve. >> >> Steps to reproduce: > [...] >> # svnserve -r /data/svn -d >> >> # svn --username myuser --password mypassword --no-auth-cache ls >> svn://localhost/myrepo >> svn: E170001: Authorization failed >> >> The user "myuser" is not included in group "readonly", so I expect the rule >> "~@readonly = rw" to take effect, but apparently this doesn't happen. >> >> This setup worked fine in the old installation (version 1.6.17). Also, it >> starts working if I add the user "myuser" to any other group: >> >> # in authz, [groups] section >> unrelatedgroup = myuser >> >> or use it in any access rule (even if the rule specifies no access): >> >> # in authz, [/] section >> myuser = >> >> I looked at the sources (subversion/libsvn_repos/authz_parse.c), and my >> guess is that this behaviour results from not setting up user's rights with >> a call to prepare_global_rights(). When a user is mentioned in authz, this >> function gets called, and authorization starts working for the user. >> >> Possibly correction of this problem could involve adding the new field >> "unkn_rights" (and "has_unkn_rights") to struct authz_full_t, so that this >> field would receive access rights from all inverted user-related access >> rules (~user, ~&alias, ~@group). Then, svn_authz__get_global_rights() would >> combine authz->has_unkn_rights with authz->has_authn_rights (instead of just >> returning authz->has_authn_rights) when user_rights is NULL. >> >> Pavel Goran >> >> P.S. I'm not subscribed to the mailing list; please CC me directly when >> replying. > Thanks for the detailed report! Yes, this is indeed a bug. I see that > you've taken time to analyse the code; could you prepare a patch with > the fix you propose? > > Also can you please create an issue in Jira: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/SVN/
I added a test case for this in r1847598, using the reproduction steps described above. -- Brane
