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

[Jonathan S. Shapiro]

Alan:

You have satisfied 1-5.

> I believe that what I've described meets criteria 1-5, but I'm not sure what #6 means.

It means that the only application entitled to update the tree is the
SCM application. Write permission requires authorized user and access
being performed by the SCM program.

However, I think your proposal extends to this fine, with only one
challenge: how to ensure in a non-persistent cap system that only the
SCM program has write access to the tree? I don't think this bootstraps
without something ACL-like.

shap