Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 20:32:28 -0600 (CST) From: David Scheidt <dscheidt@enteract.com> To: Robert Watson <robert@cyrus.watson.org> Cc: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: disapointing security architecture Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9903122021400.12879-100000@nathan.enteract.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.990312094955.6494T-100000@fledge.watson.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Fri, 12 Mar 1999, Robert Watson wrote: :The Solaris folk now appear to have ACL support in the base OS install + :FS. Where did they find the space to store the ACLs? Adding any more HP/UX 10.x does ACLs with a second inode per file with ACL. There is a pointer to the ACL-inode at the end of the normal inode. I think the reasoning is that most files will have a NULL ACL, defaulting to standard UNIX permissions, and so the overhead of fetching and writing an additional block, syncronously, is not excessive. newfs_hfs(1m) warns to allocate extra inodes if ACLs are going to be used much. This is according to the inode(4) man page, as I haven't got HP/UX source. If I had, I would have a system that I could log into the console on. David Scheidt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the messagehelp
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9903122021400.12879-100000>