Very Computer

by **Mike McGunigale x774** » Sat, 09 May 1998 04:00:00

Is there such a thing as Access Control Lists for Solaris 2.6. The
Apollo OS, Domain O/S, used
to have ACL's that would control access to files and directories.
Additional users could be
added to the ACL's, with different access rights than other users.

If ACL's are not supported in Solaris 2.6, is there any 3rd party
software that does?

Thanks,
Mike McG

*****************************************************************************
** NASA Michael J. McGunigale
** Goddard Space Flight Center Raytheon STX Corporation
** Mailstop 931.0 Phone: 301.286.7741
** Greenbelt, MD. 20771 Email:

**
** >>>>> Standard disclaimer - personal opinions only! <<<<<
*****************************************************************************

by **R!ch** » Sat, 09 May 1998 04:00:00

> Is there such a thing as Access Control Lists for Solaris 2.6. The

Yes - RTFM, where FM == acl.

HTH,

--
R!ch Teer

If it ain't analogue, it ain't music.

Risc Key Developments Ltd
Voice: +44 (0)1256 330612
WWW: www.rkdltd.demon.co.uk

by **David Ann** » Sat, 09 May 1998 04:00:00

On Fri, 08 May 1998 14:20:15 -0400, Mike McGunigale x7741

>Is there such a thing as Access Control Lists for Solaris 2.6.

man setfacl

***************************************************************
** Dave Annis * With age comes wisdom, **
** Kohler Co. * if you stay awake along the way. **
***************************************************************

by **Doug Royer [N6AA** » Sun, 10 May 1998 04:00:00

Yes - ACLs are in 2.6

> Is there such a thing as Access Control Lists for Solaris 2.6. The
> Apollo OS, Domain O/S, used
> to have ACL's that would control access to files and directories.
> Additional users could be
> added to the ACL's, with different access rights than other users.

> If ACL's are not supported in Solaris 2.6, is there any 3rd party
> software that does?

> Thanks,
> Mike McG

> *****************************************************************************
> ** NASA Michael J. McGunigale
> ** Goddard Space Flight Center Raytheon STX Corporation
> ** Mailstop 931.0 Phone: 301.286.7741
> ** Greenbelt, MD. 20771 Email:

> **
> ** >>>>> Standard disclaimer - personal opinions only! <<<<<
> *****************************************************************************

by **Casper H.S. Dik - Network Security Engine** » Tue, 12 May 1998 04:00:00

[[ PLEASE DON'T SEND ME EMAIL COPIES OF POSTINGS ]]

Quote:>Is there such a thing as Access Control Lists for Solaris 2.6. The
>Apollo OS, Domain O/S, used
>to have ACL's that would control access to files and directories.
>Additional users could be
>added to the ACL's, with different access rights than other users.

Check the setfacl/getfacl manual pages.

Yes, they're supported (since 2.5)

Casper
--
Expressed in this posting are my opinions. They are in no way related
to opinions held by my employer, Sun Microsystems.
Statements on Sun products included here are not gospel and may
be fiction rather than truth.

by em » Wed, 13 May 1998 04:00:00

> [[ PLEASE DON'T SEND ME EMAIL COPIES OF POSTINGS ]]

> >Is there such a thing as Access Control Lists for Solaris 2.6. The
> >Apollo OS, Domain O/S, used
> >to have ACL's that would control access to files and directories.
> >Additional users could be
> >added to the ACL's, with different access rights than other users.

> Check the setfacl/getfacl manual pages.

> Yes, they're supported (since 2.5)

> Casper
> --
> Expressed in this posting are my opinions. They are in no way related
> to opinions held by my employer, Sun Microsystems.
> Statements on Sun products included here are not gospel and may
> be fiction rather than truth.

Sun told me last week to check the whitepaper listings on the SunSolve
CD.

Hope this helps

EM

by **Vic Abe** » Wed, 13 May 1998 04:00:00

>[[ PLEASE DON'T SEND ME EMAIL COPIES OF POSTINGS ]]

>>Is there such a thing as Access Control Lists for Solaris 2.6. The
>>Apollo OS, Domain O/S, used
>>to have ACL's that would control access to files and directories.
>>Additional users could be
>>added to the ACL's, with different access rights than other users.
>Check the setfacl/getfacl manual pages.
>Yes, they're supported (since 2.5)

BUT ... try to set an ACL on /dev/kmem in Solaris. It can't be
done, because the driver doesn't support it. Device node ACLs are
a much better way to limit access to the kernel memory device nodes
than are group memberships. For a contrast, look at AIX, where it
is possible to define ACLs on /dev/kmem.

by **David Robins** » Fri, 15 May 1998 04:00:00

>BUT ... try to set an ACL on /dev/kmem in Solaris. It can't be
>done, because the driver doesn't support it. Device node ACLs are
>a much better way to limit access to the kernel memory device nodes
>than are group memberships. For a contrast, look at AIX, where it
>is possible to define ACLs on /dev/kmem.

Yup, the specfs filesystem that handles devices does not
understand ACLs. It is a bug we should fix.

-David

by **Casper H.S. Dik - Network Security Engine** » Sun, 17 May 1998 04:00:00

[[ PLEASE DON'T SEND ME EMAIL COPIES OF POSTINGS ]]

>BUT ... try to set an ACL on /dev/kmem in Solaris. It can't be
>done, because the driver doesn't support it. Device node ACLs are
>a much better way to limit access to the kernel memory device nodes
>than are group memberships. For a contrast, look at AIX, where it
>is possible to define ACLs on /dev/kmem.

Unfortunately, that doesn't work :-(

Casper
--
Expressed in this posting are my opinions. They are in no way related
to opinions held by my employer, Sun Microsystems.
Statements on Sun products included here are not gospel and may
be fiction rather than truth.

by **Vic Abe** » Thu, 21 May 1998 04:00:00

>>BUT ... try to set an ACL on /dev/kmem in Solaris. It can't be
>>done, because the driver doesn't support it. Device node ACLs are
>>a much better way to limit access to the kernel memory device nodes
>>than are group memberships. For a contrast, look at AIX, where it
>>is possible to define ACLs on /dev/kmem.
>Yup, the specfs filesystem that handles devices does not
>understand ACLs. It is a bug we should fix.

I had a call ID on this for Solaris 2.6 and nothing happened. My
call ID for the same problem under Solaris 2.7 Beta is 705599,
resulting in RFE 4139096. If you can add your support to that,
please do it.

Vic

Very Computer

Access Control Lists (ACL) for Solaris 2.6?

Access Control Lists (ACL) for Solaris 2.6?

Access Control Lists (ACL) for Solaris 2.6?

Access Control Lists (ACL) for Solaris 2.6?

Access Control Lists (ACL) for Solaris 2.6?

Access Control Lists (ACL) for Solaris 2.6?

Access Control Lists (ACL) for Solaris 2.6?

Access Control Lists (ACL) for Solaris 2.6?

Access Control Lists (ACL) for Solaris 2.6?

Access Control Lists (ACL) for Solaris 2.6?

Access Control Lists (ACL) for Solaris 2.6?