From owner-freebsd-security Fri Nov 26 17: 3:51 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E478F155B2 for ; Fri, 26 Nov 1999 17:03:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from robert@cyrus.watson.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (robert@fledge.pr.watson.org [192.0.2.3]) by fledge.watson.org (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA53758; Fri, 26 Nov 1999 20:03:28 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from robert@cyrus.watson.org) Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 20:03:27 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org Reply-To: Robert Watson To: Garrett Wollman Cc: David Wolfskill , security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: ACLs for FreeBSD (was: Re: ps on 4.0-current) In-Reply-To: <199911261544.KAA60836@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 26 Nov 1999, Garrett Wollman wrote: > < said: > > > The painful thing is getting ACLs into the underlying storage mechanism, > > not writing kernel ACL support -- I've finished the framework in the > > kernel, libraries, some userland utilities, and even default evaluation > > routines for file systems to call. I just don't want to screw around with > > FFS storage and soft updates :-). > > I think it would be a Great Thing if this were incorporated into > -current before the feature freeze (which is coming up RSN). Even if > it's not implemented in any file systems yet, it would be good to get > the API fixed and out in public so that people can write their > software to it. It might also be the motivating factor to actually > getting a filesystem hacker to work on that side of things. Ok -- I've put online the second pass code at http://www.watson.org/fbsd-hardening/posix1e/acl/ It includes vnode interface patches, syscall interface patches + syscall implementations, some kernel support code, a userland library, and incomplete userland utilities (getfacl, but no setfacl at this time) and some userland test code. It's under a 2-clause BSD-style license, and currently based on 3.3-RELEASE, although with some simple modifications, should run under 4.0 just fine. I don't currently have a 4.0 build machine around (in DC not in Massachusetts), so haven't tried. Because this is pretty preliminary, I'm open to questions/comments/etc. This is after a bit of thought however, so I'd welcome questions about design choices, but should have fairly legitimate answers for them :-). The primary goal was to maintain POSIX.1e compliance while also keeping in mind decent performance and a couple of BSD-isms (possible to have fd's on directories). Robert N M Watson robert@fledge.watson.org http://www.watson.org/~robert/ PGP key fingerprint: AF B5 5F FF A6 4A 79 37 ED 5F 55 E9 58 04 6A B1 TIS Labs at Network Associates, Safeport Network Services To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message