linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v18 00/22] Richacls (Core and Ext4)

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: <CAH2r5mt1SBnxnu=c8JGA1dmUUcHXG+wYXfWFQCcbC1tZT0BHpQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 15 Mar 2016 22:28:44 -0500
From:	Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>
To:	"Volker.Lendecke@...net.de" <Volker.Lendecke@...net.de>
Cc:	Cristoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Jeremy Allison <jra@...ba.org>,
	Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@...hat.com>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	Linux NFS Mailing List <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	"linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	XFS Developers <xfs@....sgi.com>,
	Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>,
	linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@...app.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 00/22] Richacls (Core and Ext4)

On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Volker Lendecke
<Volker.Lendecke@...net.de> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 08:45:14AM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 12:11:03AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> > People have long learned that we only have 'alloc' permissions.  Any
>> > model that mixes allow and deny ACE is a mistake.
>>
>> People can also learn and change though :-). One of the
>> biggest complaints people deploying Samba on Linux have is the
>> incompatible ACL models.
>
> Just to confirm: I see this a lot in the field. NFSv4 ACLs, while not a
> perfect match for NTFS ACLs are a lot closer much more usable to people
> who want to serve Windows clients.

Yes (and presumably Macs as well)



-- 
Thanks,

Steve