access_table() challenge - win a Samba t-shirt!

[Jeremy Allison]

Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 17 Jan 2000, Michael Glauche wrote:
> 
> > Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, 17 Jan 2000, Michael Glauche wrote:
> > >
> > > oh!  i wonder what happens if you convert this to ACL format?  what
> > > happens if we convert this into an ACL, with execute permissions etc being
> > > requested, etc?
> > >
> > > i wonder if a bitmask is better for this because in NT it _is_ implemented
> > > as a bitmask - SEC_ACCESS_EXECUTE; SEC_ACCESS_READ etc!
> >
> > Well .. it really looks like some tricks with bitmasks ...
> > Something like :
> > DOS_OPEN_RDONLY = 01
> > DOS_OPEN_WRONLY = 10
> > DOS_OPEN_RDWR   = 11
> >
> > (so that ..RDONLY + ..WRONLY = RDWR)
> 
> ok, so we translate the whole lot into SEC_ACCESS bitmask permissions,
> create an ACE-checker (which does SEC_ACCESS_FULL_CONTROL asa special
> case), and see what happens.

No - the deny modes are nothing to do with the SEC_ACCESS
stuff. They are *not* ACE's.

Jeremy.

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------
Buying an operating system without source is like buying
a self-assembly Space Shuttle with no instructions.
--------------------------------------------------------