when I run this code its only work with visual studio, in online compiler always tell me "cant opening file"
#include <iostream>
#include<fstream>
#include<string>
#include<iomanip>
using namespace std;
ifstream input("C:/Users/ACER/Desktop/words.txt");
if (!input.is_open())
{
cout << "cant opening file";
return 0;
}
An online compiler probably cannot open file on your computer using C++ code since that's not how the web works. It would have to route through some Javascript system, which is possible to create, however it seems the creators did not implement that when setting up their compiler.
You might try using file://C:/Users/ACER/Desktop/words.txt and double checking your path. Web browsers use that file:// thing when accessing local file i.e. if you had a web page on your computer it could be like file://C:/Users/ACER/Documents/index.html or something.
If that doesn't work, it just doesn't have the capability to load or save local files like that.
When you were attempting to use the code on an online compiler, most of the time you are actually compiling the code on their server, instead of on your computer.
What that means is that when you are trying to open "C:/Users/ACER/Desktop/words.txt", you are actually attempting to open a text file that is located on their server. And in most cases, you wouldn't be permitted to lookup any directory other than the one you are in. Even if you were permitted to do that for some reason, the chances they also have that text file on their server in the same location is gonna be really low.
Some comments above mentioned that many online compilers often don't have the facility to manipulate files. One that I often use do have the ability to do so in case you were looking for one: https://replit.com/#Ranoiaetep/IndianredSquigglyPrinters
.Note that the working directory is defaulted as your root directory.
I try to create new directory and set its permissions (using at most c++11 and without boost) so user, group and others can list files inside read them and write new files (linux environment).
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
int main(void) {
const char* path = "/tmp/newDir";
mode_t process_mask = umask(0);
int syscall_status = mkdir(path, S_IRWXU | S_IRWXG | S_IRWXO);
umask(process_mask);
return syscall_status;
}
This code is based on the man (2) page of mkdir (and umask).
However the created directory has rwxr-xr-x permissions (no write for group and others).
I also tried using chmod syscall on the directory but it didn't solve the problem. Other sources in stackoverflow treated files (rather than folders), and trying to apply the file-methods on my directory didn't work as well.
Also, I want to avoid calling system() from stdlib, this is the last option I'll use if I don't find a solution (security considerations).
char* path = "/tmp/newDir";
Besides the syntax error, this is ill-formed since C++11. Prior to that, this would be using a deprecated conversion. String literals are const in C++ -> Use pointer to const.
Other than that, the program is correct assuming a POSIX system. If it fails, then you can check errno to see why. If you don't get all permissions: Check if the parent directory has a default ACL; that would override umask.
A portable way of creating a directory in C++ is std::filesystem::create_directory and a way of setting permissions is std::filesystem::permissions.
I'm writting a C++ program in order to make some static analyse and modifications over a website. I don't change the project files, but the files are copied, analysed and modified in a new folder.
Is there a way of checking, for example, using boost::filesystem, if I (the program/the user executing it) have permissions enough to read (files), execute (for processing the directory hierarchy) and write (files or create new folders) on a current folder and its files (or at least under unix systems)?
No, you can not check file permissions with boost program options library. File permissions can be queried with boost filesystem library:
#include <boost/filesystem.hpp>
#include <stdio.h>
namespace bfs=boost::filesystem;
int main(int argc,char * argv[])
{
if (argc < 2)
return;
bfs::path p(argv[1]);
bfs::file_status s = status(p);
printf("%X\n",s.permissions());
}
The values of permissions flags are as enum perms in
boost/filesystem/v3/operations.hpp
IF you're using linux you can use stat function for get info about the file, including the mode permissions, the owner's ID and the owner's group ID of such file.
Then you can use getuid to compare the permissions of the user running the program with those obtained with stat.
Both links (that are actually man pages) has examples on how to use these functions.
Also you can try to do some operation over the selected file, lets say write, and then handle the exception properly. You don't have to access the file, just try to open it for writting, if you get and exception and errno is equal to EACCESS(permission denied) well, you don't have shuch permissions.
I'm saving my data in the executable file of the program. I copy it to a temporary file, overwrite a part starting at a 'magic string' and rename it to the original. I know this is a bad idea, but I'm doing it just for experimenting.
I got everything to work so far, except for that I have to re-enable "Allow running as an executable" each time the file is replaced. What ways are there to solve this?
Additional information: I use linux.
If you want to avoid using system(), you can use
#include <sys/stat.h>
int chmod(const char *path, mode_t mode);
It is documented in http://linux.die.net/man/3/chmod.
See also: C++ - How to set file permissions (cross platform).
If you include stdlib.h, you can use system("command").
Try it:
system("chmod 755 yourExeFile")
I am using C++ ofstream to write out a file. I want to set the permissions to be only accessible by the user: 700. In unix; I suppose I can just issue a system("chmod 700 file.txt"); but I need this code to work on Windows as well. I can use some Windows api; but what is the best c++ cross platform way to do this?
Ironically, I have just run into this very same need earlier today.
In my case, the answer came down to what level of permission granularity I need on Windows, versus Linux. In my case, I only care about User, Group, and Other permission on Linux. On Windows, the basic Read/Write All permission leftover from DOS is good enough for me, i.e. I don't need to deal with ACL on Windows.
Generally speaking, Windows has two privilege models: the basic DOS model and the newer access control model. Under the DOS model there is one type of privilege: write privilege. All files can be read, so there is no way to turn off read permission (because it doesn't exist). There is also no concept of execute permission. If a file can be read (answer is yes) and it is binary, then it can be executed; otherwise it can't.
The basic DOS model is sufficient for most Windows environments, i.e. environments where the system is used by a single user in a physical location that can be considered relatively secure. The access control model is more complex by several orders of magnitude.
The access control model uses access control lists (ACL) to grant privileges. Privileges can only be granted by a process with the necessary privileges. This model not only allows the control of User, Group, and Other with Read, Write, and Execute permission, but it also allows control of files over the network and between Windows domains. (You can also get this level of insanity on Unix systems with PAM.)
Note: The Access Control model is only available on NTFS partitions, if you are using FAT partitions you are SOL.
Using ACL is a big pain in the ass. It is not a trivial undertaking and it will require you to learn not just ACL but also all about Security Descriptors, Access Tokens, and a whole lot of other advanced Windows security concepts.
Fortunately for me, for my current needs, I don't need the true security that the access control model provides. I can get by with basically pretending to set permissions on Windows, as long as I really set permissions on Linux.
Windows supports what they call an "ISO C++ conformant" version of chmod(2). This API is called _chmod, and it is similar to chmod(2), but more limited and not type or name compatible (of course). Windows also has a deprecated chmod, so you can't simply add chmod to Windows and use the straight chmod(2) on Linux.
I wrote the following:
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#ifdef _WIN32
# include <io.h>
typedef int mode_t;
/// #Note If STRICT_UGO_PERMISSIONS is not defined, then setting Read for any
/// of User, Group, or Other will set Read for User and setting Write
/// will set Write for User. Otherwise, Read and Write for Group and
/// Other are ignored.
///
/// #Note For the POSIX modes that do not have a Windows equivalent, the modes
/// defined here use the POSIX values left shifted 16 bits.
static const mode_t S_ISUID = 0x08000000; ///< does nothing
static const mode_t S_ISGID = 0x04000000; ///< does nothing
static const mode_t S_ISVTX = 0x02000000; ///< does nothing
static const mode_t S_IRUSR = mode_t(_S_IREAD); ///< read by user
static const mode_t S_IWUSR = mode_t(_S_IWRITE); ///< write by user
static const mode_t S_IXUSR = 0x00400000; ///< does nothing
# ifndef STRICT_UGO_PERMISSIONS
static const mode_t S_IRGRP = mode_t(_S_IREAD); ///< read by *USER*
static const mode_t S_IWGRP = mode_t(_S_IWRITE); ///< write by *USER*
static const mode_t S_IXGRP = 0x00080000; ///< does nothing
static const mode_t S_IROTH = mode_t(_S_IREAD); ///< read by *USER*
static const mode_t S_IWOTH = mode_t(_S_IWRITE); ///< write by *USER*
static const mode_t S_IXOTH = 0x00010000; ///< does nothing
# else
static const mode_t S_IRGRP = 0x00200000; ///< does nothing
static const mode_t S_IWGRP = 0x00100000; ///< does nothing
static const mode_t S_IXGRP = 0x00080000; ///< does nothing
static const mode_t S_IROTH = 0x00040000; ///< does nothing
static const mode_t S_IWOTH = 0x00020000; ///< does nothing
static const mode_t S_IXOTH = 0x00010000; ///< does nothing
# endif
static const mode_t MS_MODE_MASK = 0x0000ffff; ///< low word
static inline int my_chmod(const char * path, mode_t mode)
{
int result = _chmod(path, (mode & MS_MODE_MASK));
if (result != 0)
{
result = errno;
}
return (result);
}
#else
static inline int my_chmod(const char * path, mode_t mode)
{
int result = chmod(path, mode);
if (result != 0)
{
result = errno;
}
return (result);
}
#endif
It's important to remember that my solution only provides DOS type security. This is also known as no security, but it is the amount of security that most apps give you on Windows.
Also, under my solution, if you don't define STRICT_UGO_PERMISSIONS, when you give a permission to group or other (or remove it for that matter), you are really changing the owner. If you didn't want to do that, but you still didn't need full Windows ACL permissions, just define STRICT_UGO_PERMISSIONS.
There is no cross-platform way to do this. Windows does not support Unix-style file permissions. In order to do what you want, you'll have to look into creating an access control list for that file, which will let you explicitly define access permissions for users and groups.
An alternative might be to create the file in a directory whose security settings have already been set to exclude everyone but the user.
Cross-platform example to set 0700 for a file with C++17 and its std::filesystem.
#include <exception>
//#include <filesystem>
#include <experimental/filesystem> // Use this for most compilers as of yet.
//namespace fs = std::filesystem;
namespace fs = std::experimental::filesystem; // Use this for most compilers as of yet.
int main()
{
fs::path myFile = "path/to/file.ext";
try {
fs::permissions(myFile, fs::perms::owner_all); // Uses fs::perm_options::replace.
}
catch (std::exception& e) {
// Handle exception or use another overload of fs::permissions()
// with std::error_code.
}
}
See std::filesystem::permissions, std::filesystem::perms and std::filesystem::perm_options.
The system() call is a strange beast. I have been bitten by a NOP system() implementation on a Mac many moons ago. It's implementation defined meaning the standard doesn't define what an implementation (platform/compiler) is supposed to do. Unfortunately, this is also about the only standard way of doing something outside the scope of your function (in your case -- changing the permissions).
Update: A proposed hack:
Create a non-empty file with appropriate permissions on your system.
Use Boost Filesystem's copy_file to copy this file out to your desired output.
void copy_file(const path& frompath, const path& topath): The contents and attributes of the file referred to by frompath is copied to the file referred to by topath. This routine expects a destination file to be absent; if the destination file is present, it throws an exception. This, therefore, is not equivalent to the system specified cp command in UNIX. It is also expected that the frompath variable would refer to a proper regular file. Consider this example: frompath refers to a symbolic link /tmp/file1, which in turn refers to a file /tmp/file2; topath is, say, /tmp/file3. In this situation, copy_file will fail. This is yet another difference that this API sports compared to the cp command.
Now, overwrite the output with actual contents.
But, this is only a hack I thought of long after midnight. Take it with a pinch of salt and try this out :)
No idea if it would work, but you could look into using the chmod.exe executable that comes with Cygwin.
There's no standard way to do this in C++, but for this special requirement you should probably just write a custom wrapper, with #ifdef _WIN32. Qt has a permission wrapper in it's QFile class, but this would of course mean depending on Qt ...
I just found a couple of ways to do chmod 700 easily from the Windows command line. I'm going to post another question asking for help coming up with an equivalent win32 security descriptor structure to use (if I can't figure it out in the next few hours).
Windows 2000 & XP (messy- it always seems to prompt):
echo Y|cacls *onlyme.txt* /g %username%:F
Windows 2003+:
icacls *onlyme.txt* /inheritance:r /grant %username%:r
EDIT:
If you had the ability to use the ATL, this article covers it (I don't have Visual Studio available):
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/winsdk/accessctrl2.aspx
Actually, it says the sample code includes non-ATL sample code as well- it should have something that works for you (and me!)
The important thing to remember is to get r/w/x for owner only on win32, you just have to wipe all of the security descriptors from the file and add one for yourself with full control.
You can't do it in a cross-platform manner. In Linux, you should use the function chmod(2) instead of using system(2) to spawn a new shell. On Windows, you'll have to use the various authorization functions to make an ACL (access-control list) with the proper permissions.