lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: what's next for the linux kernel?
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton writes:

[...]

> > That's exactly the point: Unix file system model is more flexible than
> > alternatives.
>
> *grin*. sorry - i have to disagree with you (but see below).
>
> i was called in to help a friend of mine at EDS to do a bastion sftp
> server to write some selinux policy files because POSIX filepermissions
> could not fulfil the requirements.

First, I was talking about flexibility attained through the separation
of notions of file and index. You just claimed elsewhere that this is
the direction ntfs took (with the introduction of hard-links).

Then, every security model has its weakness and corner cases. Try to
express

rw-r-xrw- (0656)

POSIX bits with canonical NT ACLs (hint: in NT allow-ACEs are
accumulated).

[...]

>
> POSIX permissions were designed to fit into what... 16 bits,
> so they didn't have a lot to play with.

That very good property for a security model: simplicity is a virtue
here.

Nikita.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-10-05 14:19    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans