linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -V6 00/26] 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]

Message-ID: <108028.1315442771@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Date:	Wed, 07 Sep 2011 20:46:11 -0400
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Cc:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	agruen@...nel.org, bfields@...ldses.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	dhowells@...hat.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	LSM <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -V6 00/26] New ACL format for better NFSv4 acl interoperability

On Mon, 05 Sep 2011 15:42:17 PDT, Casey Schaufler said:
> On 9/5/2011 10:25 AM, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> > The following set of patches implements VFS and ext4 changes needed to implement
> > a new acl model for linux. Rich ACLs are an implementation of NFSv4 ACLs,
> > extended by file masks to fit into the standard POSIX file permission model.
> > They are designed to work seamlessly locally as well as across the NFSv4 and
> > CIFS/SMB2 network file system protocols.
>
> POSIX ACLs predate the LSM and can't be done as an LSM due to
> the interactions between mode bits and ACLs as defined by the
> POSIX DRAFT specification. Is there a reason that "rich" ACLs
> can not be done as an LSM?

Well, if it was done as an LSM, it would mean that if I wanted to build a
system where I have a few hundred terabytes of disk exported via Samba, and I
wanted Samba to save the CIFS permission ACL, I couldn't also run Selinux or
SMACK or anything like that - unless somebody actually snuck in the "LSMs are
stackable" patch while I wasn't looking?


Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped