linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v8 00/41] Richacls

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 6 Oct 2015 14:26:09 -0600
From:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
To:	Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Austin S Hemmelgarn <ahferroin7@...il.com>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>,
	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>,
	Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@...app.com>,
	linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 00/41] Richacls

On Oct 6, 2015, at 7:12 AM, Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 05, 2015 at 02:58:36PM -0400, Austin S Hemmelgarn wrote:
>>> I think the point is that a new VFS feature that is easy to integrate in
>>> multiple filesystems should have support for those filesystems.  A decade
>>> ago, just having ext* support would probably have been fine, but these days,
>>> XFS, BTRFS, and F2FS are used just as much (if not more) on production
>>> systems as ext4, and having support for them right from the start would
>>> significantly help with adoption of richacls.
>> 
>> That's one reason.  The other is that actually wiring it up for more
>> than a single consumer shows its actually reasonable generic.
> 
> The filesystem interface now is the same as for POSIX ACLs, used by a
> dozen or so filesystems already.
> 
>> I don't want to end up with a situration like Posix ACLs again where
>> different file systems using different on disk formats again.
> 
> Any file system could choose a different on-disk format than the one
> that ext4 currently uses, but I don't see a reason why any should.
> Apart from uid / gid mappings that is the same as the user-space xattr
> format. Network file systems like NFSv4 and CIFS with their predefined
> over-the-wire formats obviously are another story.

And any disk filesystems that have their own non-POSIX ACLs, such as HFS, NTFS, ZFS would presumably also need to map the in-kernel Richacl format to their on-disk format.

Cheers, Andreas






Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)