Weekly edition	Kernel	Security	Distributions	Contact Us	Search
Archives	Calendar	Subscribe	Write for LWN	LWN.net FAQ	Sponsors

Arch for CVS Users (Linux Journal)

Posted Jun 3, 2004 11:14 UTC (Thu) by job (subscriber, #670)
In reply to: Arch for CVS Users (Linux Journal) by iabervon
Parent article: Arch for CVS Users (Linux Journal)

Linux has had ACLs for five years now, isn't it time to use them? It's
even all in the stable tree now. Works on ext2/3, xfs, jfs, reiser (a few
still require a simple patch). There's no need to mess around with the
group/owner-system in the few cases, like this one, where it is clear
ACLs makes it easier for you. The right tools for the right job! (And
tools taking advantage of this is tools done right.)

(Log in to post comments)

Posted Jun 3, 2004 20:42 UTC (Thu) by josh_stern (guest, #4868) [Link]

I'm also in favor of more future use of ACLs, but are you really saying
that it is recommended to rely on ACLs for security with non ACL aware
file modifying applications (including source control apps)? Why
exactly do you expect that newly created and modified files will
always get the intended attributes?

Arch for CVS Users (Linux Journal)

Posted Jun 10, 2004 8:09 UTC (Thu) by job (subscriber, #670) [Link]

For most repositorys my guess is that one inherited ACL should be enough.
Arch is early in its development so perhaps it can be extended to handle
the more complicated cases without too much work? I have no idea about
this really so I should let someone else talk. I meant to illustrate the
upside of leaving authentication to the operating system.