linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -V2 00/16] New ACL format for better NFSv4 acl interoperability

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, 20 Jul 2010 20:53:36 +0530
From:	"Aneesh Kumar K. V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de>
Cc:	sfrench@...ibm.com, ffilz@...ibm.com, adilger@....com,
	sandeen@...hat.com, tytso@....edu, bfields@...i.umich.edu,
	jlayton@...hat.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	nfsv4@...ux-nfs.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -V2 00/16]  New ACL format for better NFSv4 acl interoperability

On Tue, 20 Jul 2010 12:11:53 +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher <agruen@...e.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 July 2010 11:31:07 Aneesh Kumar K. V wrote:
> > We need to update ACL4_VALID_FLAGS to now consider ACL4_MASKED as a
> > valid flag.  This is also needed for userspace.
> 
> Good point, I missed that.

I updated the patch and will push the change to korg after running some
test.

> 
> > On a related note, should we move ACL4_MASKED and ACL4_POSIX_MAPPED to
> > be the higher bits ? That would make sure we will be able to accomodate
> > new flag value NFSv4 define.
> 
> That makes sense, except that ACL4_POSIX_MAPPED hasn't entered the scene in 
> the patches posted here, and I'm still not convinced that we'll actually need 
> it.
> 

The userspace change did result in a different output for the below ex:

richacl --set 'flags:a 101:w::deny 101:rw::allow 101:w:a:deny 101:rw:a:allow' f

this now gives

/mnt/d# richacl  --get --numeric  f
f:
 flags:a
   101:-w-----------::deny
   101:rw-----------::allow
   101:-w-----------:a:deny
   101:rw-----------:a:allow

that 'w' in rw::allow is redundant, because we have a deny entry before.

-aneesh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/