On 12/8/07, Jean-Pierre ANDRE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I am curios why the mapping is not done using POSIX ACLs, so that
> > getfacl and setfacl will be enabled to manage the ntfs ACLs.
>
> Well, the objective was to provide the "rwx" functionality, using the NTFS
> ACLs. This is difficult because the underlying concepts are not the same.
> Trying to use an inner layer relying on another set of concepts would add
> up to the complexity.
>
> Just for an example. You want to provide protection modes such as 0422 (or
> "r---w--w-"), typically for a user to collect some logs he/she wants to be
> sure not to spoil. To do that you have to grant a write ACE to world, which
> would enable the user to write to the file, so you have to put another ACE to
> deny writing to the owner. The problem is (as far as I know) there is no
> "deny ACE" in Posix...

cygwin already solved this.
If you take cygwin  example of POSIX ACL mapping to Windows ACL, you
get *A* solution... I mean one of many, but works.
So it can be done... And it much better than just setting the primary
mode, as it supports inheritance, multiple entries etc...

> > Also, I think an option should be given so that the UserMapping file
> > may be specify at mount time. something like mount -t ntfs-3g -o
> > usermapping=<file> ...
>
> This is simple... and complicated. Your file might not reside on the
> same device, and you end up having to shedule the mounting sequence.

This exactly what I wish... I want the mapping to exist on the system
I mount the filesystem into.

> Above all, there is a security concern if access to UserMapping is less
> secure than any data on the device. Any user could build an adequate
> UserMapping to read or destroy anything on the device... (Using plain
> ntfs-3g would be even more easier, but that is another point).

There is no security concern, as I can do whatever I like with this
filesystem anyway.

> > Finally I want to ask regarding the mandatory label of vista, will it
> > be supported?
> > http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa965848.aspx
> > I guess a special utility should be written for this, as as far as I
> > know, POSIX ACL does not support extensions (named attributes).
>
>
> I have not investigated much about requirements related to Vista,
> and I have no access to Vista myself.
>
> In what situations should this be needed ?

If you enable ACL management, it best to support all features... For
example, disk recovery, backup...

Best Regards,
Alon Bar-Lev.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
_______________________________________________
ntfs-3g-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ntfs-3g-devel

Reply via email to