Re: [bug-mailutils] Re: imap: personal "shared" folders and ACL ...

[Sergey Poznyakoff]

Andreas Barth <address@hidden> wrote:

> On further consideration, I think a tiered setup would be fine:
> 1. If there is an entry for some virtual directory in a central place,
>    this (and the associated ACLs) are used (one might consider how to
>    write such rules of course - it might be handy to be able to write
>    rules for address@hidden in the central place).

It is not quite clear what these ACLs are planned to be.

> 2. If the subdirectory is not symlinked, the default access is the same
>    as of the parent directory; if it is symlinked, the default access is
>    none. The default can be overriden by ACLs (where the ACLs should be
>    able to be written for full groups) (one might consider to have
>    allowing/all ACLs to fullfill certain requirements, e.g. being owned
>    by the owner of the directory).
> 
> Still open is IMHO how to actually access the files in any of the cases
> - is it ok to say "you can read the files only if unix permissions _and_
> ACLs are ok"?

I'd rather say "you can read the files only if unix permissions _and_
ACLs are ok, *and* namespace permissions allow you to access them".

Regards,
Sergey