On 9/12/2011 3:20 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: > On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 02:34:04PM -0700, Casey Schaufler wrote: >> On 9/7/2011 5:46 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote: >>> 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. > I don't know LSM so don't understand what you mean when you say that > interactions between mode bits and ACLs would make an ACL model hard to > implement as an LSM. POSIX ACLs require that the file permission bits change when the ACL changes. This interaction violates the strict "additional restriction" model of the LSM. > But in any case the rich acl/mode bit interactions are similar to the > posix acl/mode bit interactions, so the same issue probably applies. It would help if you knew for sure and could explain the interaction in sufficient detail to justify the position. > > --b. > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
