On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 03:15:29PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 10:57:42AM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Andreas Gruenbacher > > <agruenba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Normally, deleting a file requires MAY_WRITE access to the parent > > > directory. With richacls, a file may be deleted with MAY_DELETE_CHILD access > > > to the parent directory or with MAY_DELETE_SELF access to the file. > > > > > > To support that, pass the MAY_DELETE_CHILD mask flag to inode_permission() > > > when checking for delete access inside a directory, and MAY_DELETE_SELF > > > when checking for delete access to a file itself. > > > > > > The MAY_DELETE_SELF permission overrides the sticky directory check. > > > > And MAY_DELETE_SELF seems totally inappropriate to any kind of rename, > > since from the point of view of the inode we are not doing anything at > > all. The modifications are all in the parent(s), and that's where the > > permission checks need to be. > > I'm having a hard time finding an authoritative reference here (Samba > people might be able to help), but my understanding is that Windows > gives this a meaning something like "may I delete a link to this file". > > (And not even "may I delete the *last* link to this file", which might > also sound more logical.) I just did a recent patch here. In Samba we now check for SEC_DIR_ADD_FILE/SEC_DIR_ADD_SUBDIR on the target directory (depending on if the object being moved is a file or dir). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
