[PATCH] security descriptor stuff for HEAD

Alexey Kotovich a.kotovich at sam-solutions.net
Wed Jan 16 12:04:13 GMT 2002

Hi all!

Let me explain my position regard to subj.
I've decided to stick ads_disp_* functions to ADS because they cannot be used w/o one. 
It means that we have some differences between existing function for displaying security 
descriptor (we've got another 2 implementations of it) and these. As far as I understand, 
they are used for different cases: display_sec_* from rpcclient/display_sec.c are used for 
displaying permissions which connect to security descriptor got by RPC call, another funs 
(from rpcclient/display.c) work with file stream instead of stdout and parse NT4 permissions 
flags which overlaping ADS flags. Besides, display.c contains a lot of functions unused by ADS. 
New functions display permissions of ADS object only.
There is a problem there. Need we either create new or modify existing security descriptor? 
Andrew Bartlet and me ;) guess that it would be better to go the second way. 
At least, it can allow us to use right SD's and ACL's header.

Alexey Kotovich.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: sec_desc.patch
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 11922 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20020116/d3573515/sec_desc.bin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: disp_sec.c
Type: text/x-c
Size: 4237 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20020116/d3573515/disp_sec.bin

More information about the samba-technical mailing list