lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Feb]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: richacl(7) man page review comments
From
Hi Michael,

thanks again for all the feedback. I've followed all your suggestions;
again, please see the github repo for the latest version:

https://github.com/andreas-gruenbacher/richacl

On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 10:31 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
<mtk.manpages@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
>
> Here's a few more comments on the current richacl(7) page
> that I fetched from the git repo.
>
>> .\"
>> .\" RichACL Manual Pages
>> .\"
>> .\" Copyright (C) 2015,2016 Red Hat, Inc.
>> .\" Written by Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com>
>> .\" This is free documentation; you can redistribute it and/or
>> .\" modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
>> .\" published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of
>> .\" the License, or (at your option) any later version.
>> .\"
>> .\" The GNU General Public License's references to "object code"
>> .\" and "executables" are to be interpreted as the output of any
>> .\" document formatting or typesetting system, including
>> .\" intermediate and printed output.
>> .\"
>> .\" This manual is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
>> .\" but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
>> .\" MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
>> .\" GNU General Public License for more details.
>> .\"
>> .\" You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public
>> .\" License along with this manual. If not, see
>> .\" <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
>> .\"
>> .de URL
>> \\$2 \(laURL: \\$1 \(ra\\$3
>> ..
>> .if \n[.g] .mso www.tmac
>> .TH RICHACL 7 2015-09-01 "Linux" "Rich Access Control Lists"
>> .SH NAME
>> richacl \- Rich Access Control Lists
>> .SH DESCRIPTION
>> Rich Access Control Lists (RichACLs) are an extension of the POSIX file
>> permission model (see
>> .BR acl (5))
>> to support
>> .URL https://tools.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5661.txt "NFSv4 Access Control Lists"
>> on local and remote-mounted filesystems.
>
> Having read the following paragraph a number of times (and being
> ignorant of NFS ACLs), I find that I'm none the wiser about what you are
> trying to say. What does it mean to "apply a file mode to an... ACL"?
> Likewise, how does "the file mode determine the values of the file
> masks"? This isn't clear in the following paragraph, and doesn't seem to
> be elborated in the rest of the page. Could you add some text somehwere
> to explain these points?

I've removed this paragraph and I've tried to explain what the masks
do in the Structure of RichACLs section.

>> RichACLs support file masks which can be used to apply a file mode to an existing
>> NFSv4 ACL without destructive side effects: the file mode determines the values
>> of the file masks; the file masks restrict the permissions granted by the NFSv4
>> ACL. When a less restrictive file mode is applied later, the file masks become
>> less restrictive, and more of the original permissions can become effective.
>>
>> A RichACL can always be translated into an equivalent NFSv4 ACL which grants
>> the same permissions.
>>
>> RichACLs can be enabled on supported filesystems. This disables POSIX Access
>
> I think it might be helpful here to list which filesystems so far
> support RichACLs.
>
>> Control Lists; the two ACL models cannot coexist on the same filesystem.
>>
>> When used on a filesystem that does not support RichACLs, the
>> .BR getrichacl (1)
>> and
>> .BR setrichacl (1)
>> utilities will operate on the file permission bits instead:
>> .BR getrichacl (1)
>> will display the file permission bits as a RichACL; when a RichACL
>> is set with
>> .BR setrichacl (1)
>> which can be represented exactly by the file permission bits,
>> .BR setrichacl (1)
>> will set the file permission bits instead. An attempt to set a RichACL that
>> cannot be represented exactly by the file permission bits results in an error.
>>
>> .SS Structure of RichACLs
>>
>> RichACLs consist of a number of ACL entries, three file masks, and some flags
>> specifying attributes of the ACL as whole (by contrast with the per-ACL-entry
>> flags described below).
>
> Insert a blank line here, to start a new paragraph.
>
>> Each of the ACL entries allows or denies some permissions to a particular user,
>> group, or special entity. Each entry consists of:
>
> In the previous line you write "entity". In the lines below you use
> "identifier". The terminology switch is confusing. Use just one
> term.
>
>> .IP \(bu 4
>> A tag which specifies the user (with prefix
>> .B user:
>> or
>> .BR u: ),
>> group (with prefix
>> .B group:
>> or
>> .BR g: ),
>> or special identifier the entry applies to. Special
>> identifiers can be the file owner
>> .RB ( owner@ ),
>> the owning group
>> .RB ( group@ ),
>> or everyone
>> .RB ( everyone@ ).
>> .IP \(bu
>> A set of permissions the entry allows or denies.
>> .IP \(bu
>> A set of flags that indicate whether the user or group identifier is mapped or
>> unmapped, and whether the entry has been and can be inherited.
>> .IP \(bu 4
>> A field indicating whether the entry allows or denies access.
>
> Does this field have a name? It would make dicussing it easier
> to give it a name. That is, an ACL entry consists of four fields:
>
> * a tag
> * permissions
> * flags
> * ??? ("type"?)
>
>> .PP
>> The owner, group, and other file masks further control which permissions the
>> ACL grants, subject to the
>> .BR masked "\ (" m )
>> and
>> .BR write_through "\ (" w )
>> ACL flags.
>>
>> Note that entries with the identifier
>> .B everyone@
>> apply to all processes, whereas the \(lqother\(rq file permissions and
>> \(lqother\(rq entries in POSIX ACLs apply to all processes which are not the
>> owner, are not in the owning group, and do not match a user or group mentioned
>> in the ACL.
>>
>> Unlike POSIX ACLs, RichACLs do not have separate \(lqaccess\(rq ACLs that
>> define the access permissions and \(lqdefault\(rq ACLs that define the
>> inheritable permissions. Instead, flags on each ACL entry determine whether
>> the entry is effective during access checks and/or inheritable.
>>
>>
>> .SS ACL flags
>>
>> The following flags on ACLs are defined:
>>
>> .RS
>> .HP
>
> I don't think the heavy indentation here is helpful, and it narrors the
> text considerably. I suggest replacing the preceding .RS+.HP with .TP,
> and changing ewach .HP below to .TP, and remove the colon at the end of
> each line that follows the .TP lines.

That's what I thought too, and that's why I had ".RS 4" and ".HP 4"
here originally.

>> .BR masked "\ (" m ):
>> When set, the file masks define upper limits on the permissions the ACL may
>> grant.
>> .HP
>> .BR write_through "\ (" w ):
>> When this flag and the
>> .B masked
>> flag are both set, the owner and other file masks define the actual permissions
>> granted to the file owner and to others instead of an upper limit.
>
> There needs to be a statement here about what 'write_through' does if
> 'masked' is not set.
>
>> .HP
>> .BR auto_inherit "\ (" a ):
>> Automatic Inheritance is enabled for the file the ACL is
>> attached to. See
>> .IR "Automatic Inheritance" .
>> .HP
>> .BR protected "\ (" p ):
>> The ACL is protected from modification by Automatic
>> Inheritance.
>> .HP
>> .BR defaulted "\ (" d ):
>> The ACL has been assigned by default. Automatic Inheritance should completely
>
> What does "assigned by default" mean? That it was inherited because of
> 'dir_inherit' or 'file_inherit' in the pareent directory? This needs to
> be clearer.
>
>
>> replace the ACL.
>> .RE
>
> If you follow my suggestion above, delete the preceding .RE
>
>> .SS ACL entry flags
>>
>> The following flags on ACL entries are defined:
>>
>> .RS
>> .HP
>
> See above. Possibly change .RS+.HP to .TP
>
>> .BR file_inherit "\ (" f ):
>> The entry is inheritable for files.
>
> Maybe this would be better as:
>
> "When this flag appears in the ACL entry of a directory, then that entry is
> inherited by new files created in the directory."
>
> Is that text that I propose correct?
>
>> .HP
>> .BR dir_inherit "\ (" d ):
>> The entry is inheritable for directories.
>
> "When this flag appears in the ACL entry of a directory, then that entry is
> inherited by new subdirectories created in the directory."
>
> Is that text that I propose correct?

It's not entirely wrong, but only a small part of the truth. Entries
are inherited such that the permissions in file_inherit entries become
effective for access checking for new files, and the permissions in
dir_inherit entries become effective for access checking for new
directories, recursively.

Your feedback prompted me to look into the inheritance flag
computation more closely once again, and I found bugs. The steps of
the algorithm are explained in the section "Permissions at
file-creation time", by the way.

>> .HP
>> .BR no_propagate "\ (" n ):
>> Inheritance stops at the next subdirectory level.
>> .HP
>> .BR inherit_only "\ (" i ):
>> The entry defines inheritable permissions only and is ignored for access
>> checking.
>> .HP
>> .BR inherited "\ (" a ):
>> The entry has been automatically inherited from the parent directory; the
>> ACL's
>> .B auto_inherit
>> flag should be on.
>> .HP
>> .BR unmapped "\ (" u ):
>> The user or group identifier is a textual string and is not mapped to a numeric
>> user or group identifier. ACLs with unmapped identifiers can occur on NFSv4
>> mounted filesystems when the client cannot determine numeric user or group
>> identifiers for some of the NFSv4 user@domain or group@domain who values. They
>> cannot be assigned to local files or directories.
>> .RE
>
> If you follow my suggestion above, delete the preceding .RE
>
>>
>> .SS Permissions
>>
>> The following permissions are defined for RichACL entries and for the three
>> file masks:
>>
>> .RS
>> .HP
>
> See above. Possibly change .RS+.HP yo .TP
>
>> .BR read_data " / " list_directory "\ (" r ):
>> For a file: read the data of the file.
>> For a directory: list the contents of the directory.
>> .HP
>> .BR write_data " / " add_file "\ (" w ):
>> For a file: modify the data of the file; does not include opening the file in
>> append mode.
>> For a directory: add a new file in the directory.
>> .HP
>> .BR append_data " / " add_subdirectory "\ (" p ):
>> For a file: open the file in append mode.
>> For a directory: create a subdirectory in the directory.
>> .HP
>> .BR execute "\ (" x ):
>> For a file: execute the file.
>> For a directory: traverse / search the directory.
>> .HP
>> .BR delete_child "\ (" d ):
>> Delete a file or directory within a directory.
>> .HP
>> .BR delete "\ (" D ):
>> Delete the file or directory.
>> .HP
>> .BR read_attributes "\ (" a ):
>> Read basic attributes of a file or directory (see
>> .BR stat (2)).
>> This permission is always implicitly granted.
>
> So, can this permission ever be taken away? If yes, say so. If not, why
> does this permission exist? (And maybe say something about that.)
>
>> .HP
>> .BR write_attributes "\ (" A ):
>> Change the times associated with a file or directory to an arbitrary value.
>> This permission is always implicitly granted to the file owner.
>> .HP
>> .BR read_acl "\ (" c ):
>> Read the ACL of a file or directory. This permission is always
>> implicitly granted.
>> .HP
>> .BR write_acl "\ (" C ):
>> Change the ACL or file mode of a file or directory.
>> .HP
>> .BR write_owner "\ (" o ):
>> Take ownership of a file or directory. Change the owning group of a file or
>> directory to a group of which the calling process is a member.
>> .HP
>> .BR read_named_attrs "\ (" R ),
>> .BR write_named_attrs "\ (" W ),
>> .BR synchronize "\ (" S ),
>> .BR write_retention "\ (" e ),
>> .BR write_retention_hold "\ (" E ):
>
> If you follow my .TP suggestion above, then the above lines would need
> to be rewritten sometinh like:
>
> .BR read_named_attrs "\ (" R "), " write_named_attrs "\ (" W "), " \
> synchronize "\ (" S "), " write_retention "\ (" e "), " \
> write_retention_hold "\ (" E )
>
>> These permissions are defined by NFSv4 / NFSv4.1. They can be stored, but are
>> not used.
>> .RE
>
> If you follow my suggestion above, delete the preceding .RE and
> add .PP
>
>>
>> For the
>> .BR r ", " w ", and " p
>> permissions which have different long forms for files and directories, the
>> .BR getrichacl (1)
>> utility will output the appropriate form(s) depending on the context.
>> The
>> .BR setrichacl (1)
>> utility will accept either form for any file type.
>>
>> .SS Text form
>> The common textual representation of a RichACL consists of the colon-separated
>> fields of the the ACL flags, file masks, and ACL entries in the following
>
> s/the the/the/
>
>> format:
>> .TP
>> \fBflags:\fR\fIacl_flags\fR
>> The ACL flags.
>> .TP
>> \fBowner:\fR\fIperm\fR\fB::mask\fR, \fBgroup:\fR\fIperm\fR\fB::mask\fR, \fBother:\fR\fIperm\fR\fB::mask\fR
>> The file masks and their permissions.
>> .TP
>> \fIwho\fR\fB:\fR\fIperm\fR\fB:\fR\fIflags\fR\fB:allow\fR, \fIwho\fR\fB:\fR\fIperm\fR\fB:\fR\fIflags\fR\fB:deny\fR
>> For each ACL entry, who the entry applies to, the permissions of the entry, the
>> entry flags, and whether the entry allows or denies permissions. The \fIwho\fR
>> field has no prefix for special identifiers, a
>> .B user:
>> or
>> .B u:
>> prefix for regular users, and a
>> .B group:
>> or
>> .B g:
>> prefix for regular groups.
>
> I think the preceding sentence could be clearer. How about something
> like the following (if correct):
>
> [[
> The who field is one of the following:
>
> * One of the special identifiers: owner@, group@, or everyone@
> * A user: or u: prefix followed by a [user name, user ID?] that designates
> s specific user
> * A group: or g: prefix followed by a [group name, group ID?] that designates
> s specific group
> ]]
>
>> .PP
>> The entries are comma, whitespace, or newline separated.
>>
>> Flags and permissions have single-letter as well as long forms, as listed under
>> .IR "ACL flags" ,
>> .IR "ACL entry flags" ,
>> and
>> .IR Permissions .
>> When the single-letter forms are used, the flags or permissions are
>> concatenated. When the long forms are used, the flags or permissions are
>> separated by slashes. To align permissions or flags vertically, dashes can be
>> used for padding.
>>
>> .SS Setting and modifying file permissions
>> The access permissions for a file can either be set by assigning an access
>> control list
>> .RB ( setrichacl (1))
>> or by changing the file mode permission bits
>> .RB ( chmod (1)).
>> In addition, a file can inherit an ACL from its parent directory at creation
>> time as described under
>> .IR "Permissions at file-creation time" .
>>
>> .SS Assigning an Access Control List
>> When assigning an ACL to a file, unless explicitly specified, the owner, group,
>> and other file masks will be computed from the ACL entries as described in
>> the section
>> .IR "Computing the maximum file masks" .
>> The owner, group, and other file mode permission bits are then each set from
>> the owner, group, and other file mask as follows:
>> .IP \(bu 4
>> If the file mask includes the
>> .B r
>> permission, the read
>> file mode permission bit will be set.
>> .IP \(bu
>> If the file mask includes the
>> .B w
>> or
>> .B p
>> permission, the write file mode permission bit will be set.
>> .IP \(bu
>> If the file mask includes the
>> .B x
>> permission, the execute file mode permission bit will be set.
>> .PP
>> If the ACL can be represented exactly by the file mode
>> permission bits, the file permission bits are set to match the ACL and the ACL
>> is not stored. (When the ACL of a file is requested which doesn't have an ACL,
>> the file mode permission bits are converted into an equivalent ACL.)
>>
>> .SS Changing the file mode permission bits
>> When changing the file mode permission bits with
>> .BR chmod (1),
>> the owner, group,
>> and other file permission bits are set to the permission bits in the new mode,
>> and the file masks each are set based on the new mode bits as follows:
>> .IP \(bu 4
>> If the read bit in a set of permissions is set, the
>> .B r
>> permission in the corresponding file mask will be set.
>> .IP \(bu
>> If the write bit in a set of permissions is set, the
>> .B w
>> and
>> .B p
>> permissions in the corresponding file mask will be set.
>> .IP \(bu
>> If the execute bit in a set of permissions is set, the
>> .B x
>> permission in the corresponding file mask will be set.
>> .PP
>> In addition, the
>> .B masked
>> and
>> .B write_through
>> ACL flags are set. This has the
>> effect of limiting the permissions granted by the ACL to the file mode
>> permission bits; in addition, the owner is granted the owner mode bits and
>> others are granted the other mode bits. If the
>> .B auto_inherit
>> flag is set, the
>> .B protected
>> flag is also set to prevent the Automatic Inheritance algorithm from modifying
>> the ACL.
>>
>> .SS Permissions at file-creation time
>> When a directory has inheritable ACL entries, the following
>> happens when a file or directory is created inside that directory:
>> .RS 4
>> .IP 1. 4
>> A file created inside that directory will inherit all of the ACL entries that
>> have the
>> .B file_inherit
>> flag set, and all inheritance-related flags in the inherited entries will be
>> cleared.
>>
>> A subdirectory created inside that directory will inherit all of the ACL
>> entries that have the
>> .B file_inherit
>> or
>> .B dir_inherit
>> flag set. Entries whose
>> .B no_propagate
>> flag is set will have all inheritance-related flags cleared. Entries whose
>> .B no_propagate
>> and
>> .B dir_inherit
>> flags are not set and whose
>> .B file_inherit
>> is set will have their
>> .B inherit_only
>> flag set.
>> .IP 2.
>> If the parent directory's ACL has the
>> .B auto_inherit
>> flag set, the inherited ACL will have its
>> .B auto_inherit
>> flag set, and all entries will have their
>> .B inherited
>> flag set.
>> .IP 3.
>> The three file masks are computed from the inherited ACL as described in
>> the section
>> .IR "Computing the maximum file masks" .
>> .IP 4.
>> The three sets of permissions for the owner, the group, and for others in
>> the \fImode\fR parameter as given to
>> .BR open (2),
>> .BR mkdir (2),
>> and similar are converted into sets of RichACL permissions as described in
>> the section
>> .IR "Changing the file mode permission bits" .
>> Any RichACL permissions not included in those sets are
>> removed from the owner, group, and other file masks. The file mode permission
>> bits are then computed from the file masks as described in the section
>> .IR "Assigning an Access Control List" .
>> The process umask (see
>> .BR umask (2))
>> is ignored.
>> .IP 5.
>> The
>> .B masked
>> ACL flag is set. The
>> .B write_through
>> ACL flag remains cleared. In addition, if the
>> .B auto_inherit
>> flag of the inherited ACL is set, the
>> .B protected
>> flag is also set to prevent the Automatic Inheritance algorithm from modifying
>> the ACL.
>> .RE
>> .PP
>> When a directory does not have inheritable ACL entries, files and directories
>> created inside that directory will not be assigned access control lists and the
>> file mode permission bits will be set to (\fImode\fR\ &\ ~\fIumask\fR) where
>> \fImode\fR is the mode argument of the relevant system call and \fIumask\fR is
>> the process umask (see
>> .BR umask (2)).
>>
>> .SS Automatic Inheritance
>> Automatic Inheritance is a mechanism that allows permission changes to
>> propagate from a directory to files and subdirectories inside that directory,
>> recursively. Propagation is carried out by the process changing the directory
>> permissions (usually,
>> .BR setrichacl (1));
>> it happens without user intervention albeit not entirely automatically.
>>
>> A significant limitation is that this mechanism works only as long as files
>> are created without explicitly specifying the file permissions to use. The
>> standard system calls for creating files an directories (
>
> s/an /and /
> s/ ($//
>
>> .BR creat (2),
>
> Make that last line:
>
> .RM ( creat (2),
>
>> .BR open (2),
>> .BR mkdir (2),
>> .BR mknod (2))
>> all have mandatory mode parameters which define the maximum allowed permissions
>> of the new files. To take account of this restriction, the
>> .B protected
>> ACL flag must be set if the
>> .B inherited
>> flag is set. This effectively disables Automatic Inheritance for that
>> particular file.
>>
>> Automatic Inheritance still remains useful for network protocols like NFSv4 and
>> SMB, which both support creating files and directories without defining which
>
> s/which$/their/
>
>> permissions: they can implement those operations by using the standard system
>> calls and by then undoing the effect of applying the mode parameters.
>>
>> When the ACL of a directory is changed, the following happens for each entry
>> (\(lqchild\(rq) inside that directory:
>> .IP 1. 4
>> If the entry is a symblic link, skip the child.
>> .IP 2.
>> If the
>> .B auto_inherit
>> flag of the entry's ACL is not set or the
>> .B protected
>> flag is set, skip the child.
>> .IP 3.
>> With the child's ACL:
>> .RS 4
>> .IP a) 4
>> If the
>> .B defaulted
>> flag is set, replace the ACL with an empty ACL
>> with the
>> .B auto_inherit
>> flag set.
>> .IP b)
>> Delete all entries which have the
>> .B inherited
>> flag set.
>> .IP c)
>> Append all entries inherited from the parent directory according to step 1 of
>> the algorithm described under
>> .IR "Permissions at file-creation time".
>> Set the
>> .B inherited
>> flag of each of these entries.
>> .IP d)
>> Recompute the file masks.
>> .RE
>> .IP 4.
>> If the child is a directory, recursively apply this algorithm.
>>
>> .SS Access check algorithm
>>
>> When a process requests a particular kind of access (expressed as a set of
>> RichACL permissions) to a file, the following algorithm determines whether the
>> access is granted or denied:
>>
>> .IP 1. 4
>> If the
>> .B masked
>> ACL flag is set, then:
>> .RS 4
>> .IP a) 4
>> If the
>> .B write_through
>> ACL flag is set, then:
>> .RS 4
>> .IP \(bu 4
>> If the requesting process is the file owner, then access is granted if the
>> owner mask includes the requested permissions, and is otherwise denied.
>> .IP \(bu
>> If the requesting process is not the file owner, is not in the owning group,
>> and no ACL entries other than
>> .B everyone@
>> match the process, then access is granted if the other mask includes the
>> requested permissions, and is otherwise denied.
>> .RE
>> .IP b)
>> If any of the following is true:
>> .RS 4
>> .IP \(bu 4
>> the requesting process is the file owner and the owner mask does not include all
>> requested permissions,
>> .IP \(bu 4
>> the requesting process is not the file owner and it is in the owning group or
>> matches any ACL entries other than
>> .BR everyone@ ,
>> and the group mask does not include all requested permissions,
>> .IP \(bu 4
>> the requesting process is not the file owner, not in the owning group, it
>> matches no ACL entries other than
>> .BR everyone@ ,
>> and the other mask does not include all requested permissions,
>> .PP
>> then access is denied.
>> .RE
>> .RE
>> .IP 2.
>> Set the remaining permissions to the requested permissions. Go through all ACL
>> entries. For each entry:
>> .RS 4
>> .IP a) 4
>> If the
>> .B inherit_only
>> or
>> .B unmapped
>> flags are set, continue with the next ACL entry.
>> .IP b)
>> If any of the following is true:
>> .RS 4
>> .IP \(bu 4
>> the entry's identifier is
>> .B owner@
>> and the requesting process is the file owner,
>> .IP \(bu
>> the entry's identifier is
>> .B group@
>> and the requesting process is in the owning group,
>> .IP \(bu
>> the entry's identifier is a user and the requesting process is owned by that
>> user,
>> .IP \(bu
>> the entry's identifier is a group and the requesting process is a member in
>> that group,
>> .IP \(bu
>> the entry's identifier is
>> .BR everyone@ ,
>> .PP
>> then the entry matches the process; proceed to the next step. Otherwise,
>> continue with the next ACL entry.
>> .RE
>> .IP c)
>> If the entry denies any of the remaining permissions, access is denied.
>> .IP d)
>> If the entry allows any of the remaining permissions, then:
>> .RS 4
>> .IP \(bu 4
>> If the
>> .B masked
>> ACL flag is set and the entry's identifier is not
>> .B owner@
>> or
>> .BR everyone@
>> or is a user entry matching the file owner, remove all permissions from the
>> remaining permissions which are both allowed by the entry and included in the
>> group mask,
>> .IP \(bu
>> Otherwise, remove all permissions from the remaining permissions wich are
>> allowed by the entry.
>> .RE
>> .RE
>> .IP 3.
>> If there are no more remaining permissions, access is allowed. Otherwise,
>> access is denied.
>>
>> .SS Computing the maximum file masks
>> When setting an ACL and no file masks have been explicitly specified and when
>> inheriting an ACL from the parent directory, the following algorithm is used
>> for computing the file masks:
>>
>> .IP 1. 4
>> Clear the owner, group, and other file masks. Remember which permissions have
>> already been processed (initially, the empty set).
>> .IP 2.
>> For each ACL entry:
>> .RS 4
>> .IP \(bu 4
>> If the
>> .B inherit_only
>> flag is set, skip the entry.
>> .IP \(bu 4
>> Otherwise, compute which permissions the entry allows or denies that have not
>> been processed yet (the remaining permissions).
>> .IP \(bu
>> If the entry is an
>> .B owner@
>> entry, add the remaining permissions to the owner mask for
>> .B allow
>> entries, and remove the remaining permissions from the owner mask for
>> .B deny
>> entries.
>> .IP \(bu
>> Otherwise, if the entry is an
>> .B everyone@
>> entry, proceed as with
>> .B owner@
>> entries but add or remove the remaining permissions from the owner, group, and
>> other file masks.
>> .IP \(bu
>> Otherwise, proceed as with
>> .B owner@
>> entries but add or remove the remaining permissions from the owner and group
>> file masks.
>> .IP \(bu
>> Add the entry's permissions to the processed permissions.
>> .RE
>> .PP
>> The resulting file masks represent the ACL as closely as possible. With these
>> file masks, if the
>> .B masked
>> ACL flag is set, the effective permissions still stay the same.
>>
>> .\" .SH BUGS
>> .SH AUTHOR
>> Written by Andreas Grünbacher <agruenba@redhat.com>.
>>
>> Please send your bug reports, suggested features and comments to the above address.
>
> Could we start with just a few simple examples already, and build up
> over future iterations of this page?
>
>> .SH CONFORMING TO
>> Rich Access Control Lists are Linux-specific.
>> .SH SEE ALSO
>> .BR acl (5),
>> .BR chmod (1),
>> .BR getrichacl (1),
>> .BR ls (1),
>> .BR setrichacl (1)
>> .BR stat (2),
>> .BR umask (2)
>> .\" librichacl

Thanks,
Andreas

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-02-20 17:41    [W:0.283 / U:0.324 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site