Document why DirExt::access on Windows doesn't use their faccess equivalent
Nobody has claimed this yet.
Assessment
- Difficulty
- 2/5
- Estimated time
- 1-3 hours
- Newbie friendliness
- 68/100
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- documentation, security
Research direction
Start by locating the Windows implementation of DirExt::access and read how it currently checks access by opening the file. Compare that approach with the linked Microsoft CRT APIs and faccess Windows implementation, then document the project’s rationale, including any dependency or auditing concerns that are confirmed. Done means the rationale is clear to readers without changing the implementation.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Description
I noticed that your Windows implementation of DirExt::access just tries opening the file.
I understand if _access, _waccess, t_access or _access_s, _waccess_s, _taccess_s from the Microsoft C Runtime impose additional dependencies you want to avoid, and that the Win32 API-native version's overcomplicated credentials blow up to six pages in the faccess crate's Windows implementation (Link to the source file, MIT-licensed) once you address various edge cases.
However, I was unable to find any clear documentation for the rationale behind that. (Which I'm guessing is "auditing burden".)
Could that be improved, please?
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 821
- Forks
- 59
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
More from bytecodealliance/cap-std
-
Archiving cap-std Open
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 15/100
bytecodealliance/cap-std#426 · 2 comments ·
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 45/100
bytecodealliance/cap-std#423 · 5 comments ·
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 42/100
bytecodealliance/cap-std#408 · 4 comments · 2 reactions ·
-
Difficulty 4/5 3-5 days Newbie friendliness 55/100
bytecodealliance/cap-std#406 · 1 comment · 2 reactions ·
-
Difficulty 5/5 Over a week Newbie friendliness 25/100
bytecodealliance/cap-std#373 · 4 comments ·
All issues in bytecodealliance/cap-std
Similar issues
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 85/100
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 84/100
Eynzof/Hermes-CN-Desktop#610 ·
-
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 88/100
-
bug team:backend track:services-maintenance
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 78/100
cowprotocol/services#4950 ·
-
bug
Difficulty 2/5 1-3 hours Newbie friendliness 68/100
gitbutlerapp/gitbutler#15998 · 1 comment ·