Re: [RFC PATCH] CIFS posix acl permission checking

Volker Lendecke <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.file-systems.cifs
Organization SerNet GmbH, Goettingen, Germany
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 07:58:03AM -0500, simo wrote:
> > The reason why my customer wants to get away from NFS is the
> > 16 groups limit. Different question: Why is s4u2proxy more
> > secure than allowing "su - <user>" over cifs?
> 
> Because you can control at the KDC level which tickets the server is
> allowed to get. And without giving out user credentials or even root
> credentials. And because this way you don't change the security model.

Ok. Which KDCs support this?

Volker

_______________________________________________
linux-cifs-client mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.samba.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-cifs-client
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 197 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkuaO4kACgkQbZMKAi3WUklkSwCdE57n5uXOBfwlj1wOI+5IirWW
GLQAnA/jwjBnOdg5ZpdFTuwMgxSU6D2L
=BJX8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.