From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Oct 27 8:51:26 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from blackhelicopters.org (geburah.blackhelicopters.org [209.69.178.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 813FE1515B for ; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 08:51:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org) Received: (from mwlucas@localhost) by blackhelicopters.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA98056; Wed, 27 Oct 1999 11:51:12 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mwlucas) From: Michael Lucas Message-Id: <199910271551.LAA98056@blackhelicopters.org> Subject: Re: UFS ACLs In-Reply-To: from Chuck Youse at "Oct 27, 1999 11:28:41 am" To: cyouse@paradox.nexuslabs.com (Chuck Youse) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 11:51:12 -0400 (EDT) Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I admittedly haven't done much homework on this topic, but I was wondering > if anyone has played with the idea of implementing ACLs on top of UFS. > > One of the weakest areas in UNIX is its lack of fine-grained access > control for resources - the biggest resource being, of course, the > filesystem. > > Chuck Youse Chuck -- Go do your homework. :) Check the freebsd-security archive for copious, endless discussions on this subject, requirements therefore, etc. ==ml To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message