PROPOSAL: extend UNIX_INFO2 to mark existence of ACLs

[George Colley]

Man I didn't think things would get this crazy. I have a little  
reading to do before comment further, but really all we want was for a  
client to know if the posix modes were the only security on the file.  
I would prefer only going across the wire to get the acl if one exits.  
Let me read the whole thread and see if I can figure out all the  
arguments.

George
On Jan 23, 2008, at 10:19 AM, Christopher R. Hertel wrote:

> I have been reading those papers recently, and have tried pinging  
> him once
> or twice.  I haven't heard back.
>
> Steve French wrote:
>> Possibly useful background, Andreas's paper from a few years ago
>> describes some of the issues involved with mode bits, POSIX ACLs,  
>> CIFS
>> and NFSv4 ACLs:
>>
>> http://www.suse.de/~agruen/acl/linux-acls/online/
>>
>> and a more recent paper on NFSv4 ACLs and Linux
>> http://www.suse.de/~agruen/agruen-nfs4acl.pdf
>>
>> Does anyone know what ever happened with the per-mount permission  
>> model
>> he suggested:
>> http://www.suse.de/~agruen/permission-models.pdf
>>
>
> -- 
> "Implementing CIFS - the Common Internet FileSystem"    ISBN:  
> 013047116X
> Samba Team -- http://www.samba.org/    -)-----     Christopher R.  
> Hertel
> jCIFS Team -- http://jcifs.samba.org/  -)-----  ubiqx development,  
> uninq
> ubiqx Team -- http://www.ubiqx.org/    -)-----          crh at ubiqx.mn.org
> OnLineBook -- http://ubiqx.org/cifs/   -)-----             crh at ubiqx.org