[9] RFC on 8073061: Files.copy(foo, bar, REPLACE_EXISTING) deletes bar even if foo is not readable

[Alan Bateman]

On 18/02/2015 09:05, Francis Galiegue wrote:
> :
> OK, so, in this matrix of test cases, what is supposed to happen when:
>
> * the destination is a regular file on which you have write access,
> * the source is a regular file on which you DO NOT have read access?
>
> My hope: leave the destination alone. Am I right?
>
That's right. The bug that we have now is that we assume that the source 
is readable when its attributes can be read. There is a similar issue on 
Windows although it's more difficult to create that scenario. And to be 
clear, it is not a security issue, the permission checks are correct for 
the case that you are running with a security manager.

-Alan