[cap-talk] More Heresey: ACLs not inherently bad

[Jonathan S. Shapiro]

On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 21:46 +0100, Mark Seaborn wrote:
> "Jonathan S. Shapiro" <shap at eros-os.com> wrote:
> As far as I can tell, the 6 requirements you listed on
> http://www.eros-os.org/pipermail/cap-talk/2008-September/011633.html
> are satisfied by the DSCM gatekeeper I suggested....
>
> You don't need ACLs *or* capabilities to satisfy your requirements.

How is requirement 2 satisfied without an ACL of some sort? The criteria
for legal updates is principal based?

Also, how is problem of protecting the underlying state in the file
system addressed without ACLs?


shap