similar to: Copying EAs and ACLs

This is a PoC patch for NFSv4/ZFS ACLs. The objective of the patch is that rsync --acls support NFSv4/ZFS ACLs without requiring a new command line option NFSv4 ACLs can't be represented using POSIX draft ACLs, if an NFSv4 ACL is present a separate POSIX draft ACL will not be present and there are new APIs to access NFSv4 ACLs. So we need to distinguish between NFSv4 ACLs and POSIX ACLs in

I have an NFS4 server exporting a folder, and a Samba server importing that folder which it then turns around and shares over Samba. I would like Windows machines accessing this folder and its sub folders to be properly restricted according to ACLs. The NFS4 server is running CentOS 5.7 and is NFS exporting an EXT4 folder. The Samba server is running CentOS 6.0, and Samba 3.5.4-68.el6_0.2. On the

Jerry, Jeremy, Whilst fixing bug 2445, I stumbled across NFSv4 ACLs with EA version 2 capability. This is only supported on filesystems that are created JFS2 with Extended Attribute Version 2 support which is part of the NFSv4 ACL support native to JFS2 in AIX 5.3. This is new in AIX 5.3 and I'd like to get to work implementing it as an addition to Linux and IRIX EA support. Are the any

Hi, We are running into a problem with a Samba setup and would like to know if a current fix or workaround is at all possible. Our setup is a NetApp filer serving NFS v4 that is mounted by Solaris and Linux servers. On those servers we are using Samba to create shares of those NFSv4 mounted filesystems. We are migrating to this NFSv4 setup from an existing Solaris NFSv3+Posix ACL setup that also

The FreeBSD ACL implementation is currently based on a late POSIX.1e draft, and is similar in functionality to the ACL support in Solaris, IRIX, and Linux. It was developed along a similar timeline to the Linux ACL support, and Andreas and I chatted a fair amount along the way so the parallels are strong -- in fact, the Samba ACL support is almost identical, and the ACL API man pages on

Hi all, I am in the process of finding the best way to use Samba4 as an AD under FreeBSD and ZFS. The following is based on own research, google, mail archives, a bit of source code etc. So please correct me if I am wrong. 1. ZFS is using NFSv4 ACLs. 2. NFSv4 ACLs are modelled with NTFS (Windows) ACLs in mind. 3. Samba4 started with a new ntvfs file server but that was abandoned (or

>> Hi, >> sorry I forget to specify OS. >> I'm using: >> RH 7.2 kernel 2.4.9 >> FS - XFS 1.0.2=20 >> Samba 2.2.3a >> I'm using XFS ACL, but I need set EA(ACL) to Change (read - yes, write - >> yes, delete - no, execute - no). >> I don't know how to set this with standard UNIX permissions (rwx).=20 >>

This is possibly the dumbest question I have asked ever, but how do you set ACLs on files within a ZFS filesystem? Trying to use setfacl(1) diverts me to the acl(5) manpage; well, I know that I need to use NFSv4 style ACLs, but where is the utility to do so? This is on Solaris 10 Update 2. Thanks, Ceri -- That must be wonderful! I don''t understand it at all.

Good morning, folks. I'm involved in a project to enforce NFSv4 ACL's across a variety of storage platforms, in particular NetApps sharing NFS. That works fiine with the NetApp NFS qtrees, but we'd like to share those with CIFS clients as well. This works, and restricts access the way we expect NFSv4 ACL's to work, but the Windows clients cannot view any of the security settings

hi there - is it possible to share a directory via samba and (kernel-)nfsv4 in parallel and make samba use (ie.: read, write and enforce) nfsv4 acls to implement winnt-acls? i know that using nfs3 and posix acls is working halfway okay, but couldn't find anything useful for nfsv4 and the associated acls - sorry if i missed something obvious. i played around with the nfs4acl_xattr and

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeremy Allison" <jra at samba.org> > To: "Nick E Couchman" <nick.couchman at seakr.com> > Cc: samba at lists.samba.org > Sent: Thursday, December 3, 2015 6:13:51 PM > Subject: Re: [Samba] Linux & NFSv4 ACLs > On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 06:03:39PM -0700, Nick Couchman wrote: >> >> > On Dec 3,

Hi @all! I want to backup Windows files to a Linux Server including the Windows ACLs. I found this at nabble.com http://www.nabble.com/Rsync-windows-acls-td21205816.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On Mon, 2008-12-29 at 09:54 -0700, Michael Chletsos wrote: > Has rsync integrated windows acls into it yet? No, and the main

Thank you for the answer. I understand that default (POSIX) ACLs will lead to similar results, but the parent directory of this file had no default ACL, and when opening its properties / security dialog I also don't see any inheritance specified. However I can accept that SaMBa works this way and I can even see that Word did some deliberate ACL manipulation, but this "piling up" of

Hi people, I'm testing Samba 4.0.17 running as classic pdc mode under FreeBSD 10 and 9.2 , all shares are on ZFS volumes, i would like to use UFS instead of ZFS , but according the wiki page https://wiki.freebsd.org/NFSv4_ACLs nfsv4 inheritance flags works only with ZFS , i tried the parameters inherit acls and inherit permissions with module vfs_zfsacl on the UFS shares but got no success

On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Volker Lendecke <vl at samba.org> wrote: > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 05:38:57PM +0100, Christoph Kleineweber wrote: > > I am wondering if there is a way to bypass Samba's ACL checks and > delegate > > access control completely to the underlying file system. > > > > My problem arises from the following scenario: Our file system

Hello, I have today released an initial version of extended attributes and access control lists for ext3 (patch against the 2.4.13-ac3 kernel). Eric Jarman <ejarman@acm.org> has contributed a lot to this effort. Since I'm not very much into the innards of ext3, can some of you please take a look at the patch, and see whether it contains any flaws (and tell me which flaws)? Thanks! The

This might be more inclusive if I said, Linux Permissions vs POSIX ACLs vs vfs_xattr. I have recently begun to discover the power and flexibility of using POSIX ACLs (by mounting my EXT3/4 filesystems with the acl option). This solved alot of security permissions issues between Samba and Linux groups of users. As I have delved into this deeper and begun using the VFS object, vfs_xattr, things

----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jeremy Allison" <jra at samba.org> > To: "Nick E Couchman" <nick.couchman at seakr.com> > Cc: samba at lists.samba.org > Sent: Friday, December 4, 2015 1:22:06 PM > Subject: Re: [Samba] Linux & NFSv4 ACLs > On Thu, Dec 03, 2015 at 07:31:36PM -0700, Nick Couchman wrote: >> >> Try these pages (U

Please can someone clarify the purpose of the "ea support = yes" option in smb.conf? According to the man page, it's there to allow _clients_ to attempt to store OS/2 style extended attributes. As long as the underlying server filesystem supports EAs, this will work. However, I've seen a number of references to setting "ea support = yes" when people just want to store

I''m currently prototyping a Solaris file server that will dish out user home directories and group project directories via NFSv4 and Samba. I have samba configured and integrated into our local active directory, with ACL mapping working. I''m a little confused as to the behavior of the ZFS ACL though. on a brand-new filesystem, touching a file results in: -rw-r--r-- 1 root