I have no idea what is going on but this looks good. I agree with you guys. Upvoted.
this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2023
368 points (100.0% liked)
Linux
1253 readers
86 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
It's for more granular access permissions for files and folders.
Cool. Does ACL support also depend on the filesystem?
Yes. Some filesystems straight up do not support ACL of any kind (eg: fat32)
Fat32 doesn't support regular file permissions either, right? I was under the impression that it was permissionless.
You are entirely correct, it has no permission system to speak of
load more comments
(8 replies)
Yeah, but I think all reasonably-modern Unixy filesystems on Linux will support ACLs. ext2/3/4, btrfs, xfs, zfs, jfs, etc.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Technically, this is also possible by creating extra groups, but this kind of access control presumably exists because the old-school method can be a pain to administer. Choosing group names can also be an "interesting" secondary challenge.
i.e. Dude's not going to be best pleased if they ls -l and see the group on the file is xyzgroup-but-not-dude even if it is with good reason. (Shouldn't have deleted the database, dude.)
In a previous life (in the 90s) I was a un*x sysadmin, and ACL is nightmarish in big company, I hated it and avoided it
I don't really think that that's a realistic goal for ACLs. I mean, getfacl showing the user specifically being excluded probably isn't any more-polite.
Cool, I didn't know ACLs were a widely available thing but the infographic explains pretty well! Sounds really useful when granular controls are needed, but I could also imagine it being a huge pain in environments already built out and scripted around regular permissions. Still as always, options are good and an ounce of planning is worth a pound of troubleshooting.
I do low-key hate seeing a directory named "dir" and a group named "me" though. That's chaotic neutral shit at the very least.
ACL Access-Control Lists
Access Control List Access Control Lists?
Does anybody use ACL without regretting it?
The only thing you need to know about file acls is not to use them. Similar thing can be said for Network ACLs to be honest.
That's all fine and dandy, but why does it say rxw on the left?