lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Mar]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v18 00/22] Richacls (Core and Ext4)
    On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 05:11:51PM +0100, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote:
    > > while breaking a lot of assumptions,
    >
    > The model is designed specifically to be compliant with the POSIX
    > permission model. What assumptions are you talking about?

    People have long learned that we only have 'alloc' permissions. Any
    model that mixes allow and deny ACE is a mistake.

    > > especially by adding allow and deny ACE at the same time.
    >
    > I remember from past discussions that a permission model like the
    > POSIX ACL model that doesn't have DENY ACEs would be more to your
    > liking. This argument is dead from the start though: NFSv4 ACLs
    > without DENY ACEs cannot represent basic file permissions like 0604
    > where the owning group has fewer permissions than others, for example
    > (see the richaclex(7) man page). We would end up with a permission
    > model that isn't even compatible with the traditional POSIX file
    > permission model, one which nobody else implements or cares about.

    So let's stick to the model that we already have.

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2016-03-15 08:41    [W:4.344 / U:0.272 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site