What | Removed | Added |
---|---|---|
Flags | needinfo?(nopower@suse.com) |
(In reply to Christian Boltz from comment #3) > Seth Arnold asked me to forward this question to you: > > I -do- have to ask, if this is the first time they actually need it, could > they store their acls in samba.NTACL instead? why does their acl have to > live in the security. xattr namespace? so afaics this functionality has been in place for quite some time, could another namespace be used ? I suppose it could, but even so that would not happen in the short term (so we suse at least would need a patch), making such a change would require some sort of migration path. As I understand it (from looking back through the archives) one of the original reasons for choosing the security namepace was there was a hope to eventually implement a LSM module that understands these ACLs (and move away from interpreting them in smbd) The historical discussion is here http://samba-technical.samba.narkive.com/eHtOW8DE/nt-acls-using-the-security-namespace-for-ntacl-considered-improper where it seems the decision was to keep the security namespace. Hope this answers your question