[mdlug] ACLs difficult to administer?

[Aaron Kulkis]

Dean Durant wrote:
> Hello, say the usual format of ugo (user, group, other)
> isn't sufficient in a certain situation.

Note that such a "certain situation" is extremely rare.

>     You need multiple groups with multiple sets of
> different permissions.

And easily accomplished with a minimal amount of cleverness.

Remember... you have 65535 Group IDs.

Usually trivial to administrate, and adapts very easy
to user turn-over, as the only thing an admin needs to
do is update group membership.


> You can do it with ACLs.

If you're a masochist.

> Are ACLs hard to manage?


traditional Unix/Linux permission bits:
    add user's login to a group

ACL's: find EVERY file with identical permission given to
       ALL group members, and then add the new user to
       the ACL for that file.

I don't know...which do YOU think is more difficult?




> Is NTFS any better?

NTFS only has ACLs...which in most cases, is a royal
pain in the ass.

> Why might someone say so?

Because they've never used anything other than Windows.

>  What is the tie-in with samba?

Huh?

>   If someone says ntfs is easier, are they just being lazy?

Lazy as in too lazy to learn about anything other than
FAT and NTFS.  In other words, it's laziness expressed
as ignorance.

>  Thanks, Dean

Are you for real?