FW: Description of the new 'ntsec' feature

[Corinna Vinschen]

Jason Zions wrote:
> [...]
> Corinna, I doubt Emanuale was suggesting you look at the source code for
> Interix; especially since that's not available. I think he was suggesting
> that you look into the mapping Interix used, not its implementation.
> 
> Interix has a very clean mapping of full POSIX semantics to NTFS security.
> The specifics of that mapping are outlined in a tech note available at
> http://www.interix.com . Some discussion of the rationale for some of our
> choices appears in that document.
> 
> I would be more than happy to talk about the specifics of the mapping we've
> elected to use, about its drawbacks and advantages, and things we're
> planning to do differently and better. It would be a good thing for Interix
> and cygwin to use NTFS permissions in the same way to mean the same things
> w.r.t. Unix permissions; I am quite open to considering changes in our model
> if they increase the fidelity of our security model to that provided by UNIX
> systems.

Hi Jason,

thanks for the input. Sorry for the long response lag. I'm very short
of time at the moment. The current project of my firm is in a critical
state, so I don't see the daylight as often as I want :(

I agree to your text. I know, that my model isn't really complete.
Did you read my description? Did you test one of the latest
snapshots with CYGWIN=ntsec? I'd like to hear your opinion.

Shame on me: I didn't read the aforementioned tech note so far.
Would you be so kind, to send it as an attachment, so I can't forget
it to read?

I would appreciate further discussions but please be patient.

Best Regards,
Corinna



--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com