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  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 15:55:01 -0500
From:	Steve French <>
To:	Andreas Dilger <>
Cc:	Andreas Gruenbacher <>,
	Christoph Hellwig <>,
	Austin S Hemmelgarn <>,
	Alexander Viro <>,
	"Theodore Ts'o" <>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <>,
	Jeff Layton <>,
	Trond Myklebust <>,
	Anna Schumaker <>,
	linux-ext4 <>,
	LKML <>,
	linux-fsdevel <>,
	"" <>,
	Linux API <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 00/41] Richacls

On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 3:26 PM, Andreas Dilger <> wrote:
> On Oct 6, 2015, at 7:12 AM, Andreas Gruenbacher <> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Christoph Hellwig <> 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.

Will be interesting to see whether in the long run can have some
common code in NTFS, CIFS/SMB3 (and even NFSv4.x) ACL parsing since
their formats are quite closely related


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists