Fixed very subtle bug returning correct error on an open, when we have

a choice of invalid share mode and access denied. We must return the
access denied by preference, but also remember to break the oplocks...
This is needed for multi-user MS-Access.
Jeremy.
(This used to be commit 7eb7241442ea0f1e065b009c3cccd5821b89a8b6)

2 files changed, 91 insertions, 10 deletions

diff --git a/source3/smbd/open.c b/source3/smbd/open.c
index 258e463ecf..b23da55542 100644
--- a/source3/smbd/open.c
+++ b/source3/smbd/open.c
@@ -649,6 +649,20 @@ files_struct *open_file_shared(connection_struct *conn,char *fname, SMB_STRUCT_S
 		num_share_modes = open_mode_check(conn, fname, dev, inode, share_mode,
 								&flags, &oplock_request, &all_current_opens_are_level_II);
 		if(num_share_modes == -1) {
+
+			/*
+			 * This next line is a subtlety we need for MS-Access. If a file open will
+			 * fail due to share permissions and also for security (access)
+			 * reasons, we need to return the access failed error, not the
+			 * share error. This means we must attempt to open the file anyway
+			 * in order to get the UNIX access error - even if we're going to
+			 * fail the open for share reasons. This is bad, as we're burning
+			 * another fd if there are existing locks but there's nothing else
+			 * we can do. We also ensure we're not going to create or tuncate
+			 * the file as we only want an access decision at this stage. JRA.
+			 */
+			open_file(fsp,conn,fname,psbuf,flags|(flags2&~(O_TRUNC|O_CREAT)),mode);
+
 			unlock_share_entry(conn, dev, inode);
 			file_free(fsp);
 			return NULL;
@@ -676,14 +690,6 @@ files_struct *open_file_shared(connection_struct *conn,char *fname, SMB_STRUCT_S
 		return NULL;
 	}
 
-	/* not that we ignore failure for the following. It is
-           basically a hack for NFS, and NFS will never set one of
-           these only read them. Nobody but Samba can ever set a deny
-           mode and we have already checked our more authoritative
-           locking database for permission to set this deny mode. If
-           the kernel refuses the operations then the kernel is wrong */
-	kernel_flock(fsp, deny_mode);
-
 	/*
 	 * Deal with the race condition where two smbd's detect the file doesn't
 	 * exist and do the create at the same time. One of them will win and
@@ -710,6 +716,14 @@ files_struct *open_file_shared(connection_struct *conn,char *fname, SMB_STRUCT_S
 		 */
 	}
 
+	/* note that we ignore failure for the following. It is
+           basically a hack for NFS, and NFS will never set one of
+           these only read them. Nobody but Samba can ever set a deny
+           mode and we have already checked our more authoritative
+           locking database for permission to set this deny mode. If
+           the kernel refuses the operations then the kernel is wrong */
+	kernel_flock(fsp, deny_mode);
+
 	/*
 	 * At this point onwards, we can guarentee that the share entry
 	 * is locked, whether we created the file or not, and that the
diff --git a/source3/utils/torture.c b/source3/utils/torture.c
index d9aa6bfca0..cd348f67fd 100644
--- a/source3/utils/torture.c
+++ b/source3/utils/torture.c
@@ -2010,7 +2010,7 @@ static void run_oplock2(int dummy)
 		printf("lock failed (%s)\n", cli_errstr(&cli1));
 	}
 
-	cli_unlock(&cli, fnum1, 0, 4);
+	cli_unlock(&cli1, fnum1, 0, 4);
 
 	sleep(2);
 
@@ -2018,7 +2018,7 @@ static void run_oplock2(int dummy)
 		printf("lock failed (%s)\n", cli_errstr(&cli1));
 	}
 
-	cli_unlock(&cli, fnum1, 0, 4);
+	cli_unlock(&cli1, fnum1, 0, 4);
 
 	sleep(2);
 
@@ -2045,6 +2045,72 @@ static void run_oplock2(int dummy)
 	printf("finished oplock test 2\n");
 }
 
+/*
+  Test open mode returns on read-only files.
+ */
+static void run_opentest(int dummy)
+{
+    static struct cli_state cli1;
+    char *fname = "\\readonly.file";
+    int fnum1, fnum2;
+	uint8 eclass;
+	uint32 errnum;
+
+    printf("starting open test\n");
+
+    if (!open_connection(&cli1)) {
+        return;
+    }
+
+	cli_setatr(&cli1, fname, 0, 0);
+    cli_unlink(&cli1, fname);
+
+    cli_sockopt(&cli1, sockops);
+
+    fnum1 = cli_open(&cli1, fname, O_RDWR|O_CREAT|O_EXCL, DENY_NONE);
+    if (fnum1 == -1) {
+        printf("open of %s failed (%s)\n", fname, cli_errstr(&cli1));
+        return;
+    }
+
+    if (!cli_close(&cli1, fnum1)) {
+        printf("close2 failed (%s)\n", cli_errstr(&cli1));
+        return;
+    }
+
+	if (!cli_setatr(&cli1, fname, aRONLY, 0)) {
+		printf("cli_setatr failed (%s)\n", cli_errstr(&cli1));
+		return;
+	}
+
+    fnum1 = cli_open(&cli1, fname, O_RDONLY, DENY_WRITE);
+    if (fnum1 == -1) {
+        printf("open of %s failed (%s)\n", fname, cli_errstr(&cli1));
+        return;
+    }
+
+	/* This will fail - but the error should be ERRnoaccess, not ERRshare. */
+    fnum2 = cli_open(&cli1, fname, O_RDWR, DENY_ALL);
+
+	cli_error( &cli1, &eclass, &errnum, NULL);
+
+	if (eclass != ERRDOS || errnum != ERRnoaccess) {
+		printf("wrong error code (%x,%x) = %s\n", (unsigned int)eclass,
+				(unsigned int)errnum, cli_errstr(&cli1) );
+	} else {
+		printf("correct error code ERRDOS/ERRnoaccess returned\n");
+	}
+
+	
+	cli_close(&cli1, fnum1);
+
+	cli_setatr(&cli1, fname, 0, 0);
+	cli_unlink(&cli1, fname);
+
+    close_connection(&cli1);
+
+    printf("finished open test 1\n");
+}
 
 static void list_fn(file_info *finfo, const char *name)
 {
@@ -2212,6 +2278,7 @@ static struct {
 	{"TCON",  run_tcon_test, 0},
 	{"RW1",  run_readwritetest, 0},
 	{"RW2",  run_readwritemulti, FLAG_MULTIPROC},
+	{"OPEN", run_opentest, 0},
 	{NULL, NULL, 0}};