[LU-3887] lfs lsetfacl and lfs rsetfacl fail to generate changelog records Created: 05/Sep/13  Updated: 09/Oct/21  Resolved: 09/Oct/21

Status: Resolved
Project: Lustre
Component/s: None
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: None

Type: Bug Priority: Major
Reporter: Colin Faber [X] (Inactive) Assignee: WC Triage
Resolution: Won't Fix Votes: 0
Labels: None
Environment:

SL6.4, lustre 2.4.1


Attachments: PDF File Remote_acl_HLD_v2.pdf    
Issue Links:
Related
is related to LU-6971 Remove obsolete remote client and "lf... Resolved
Rank (Obsolete): 10131

 Description   

lfs ACL control commands lsetfacl and rsetfacl fail to generate changelog records.

Standard setfacl commands do generate XATTR changelog events.

-cf



 Comments   
Comment by Colin Faber [X] (Inactive) [ 11/Sep/13 ]

These are Kerberos functions.

Comment by Andreas Dilger [ 17/Oct/13 ]

Colin, I'm not sure what you are expecting here? Do these commands actually do anything useful today? Is there any documentation that might explain what they are or what they are supposed to do? Now that you've alerted me to their existence, I'm almost inclined to delete this code since I'm not even sure there is anyone who understands it anymore.

Comment by Colin Faber [X] (Inactive) [ 17/Oct/13 ]

Hi Andreas,

The only thing I can find on them is an HLD from Fan Yong back in 2007 (attached to the ticket). Likely unless further work is done on remote ACL control these can be removed, IU may be utilizing part of this, but without talking with them directly I'm not sure.

-cf

Comment by Colin Faber [X] (Inactive) [ 17/Oct/13 ]

Remote ACL HLD PDF

Comment by Andreas Dilger [ 17/Oct/13 ]

Fan Yong,
does the remote ACL code work at all, or is it dead code that could be removed? Indiana is implementing a remote UID/GID mapping feature that does not depend on Kerberos, so the question is whether this code will become obsolete, or if it is still needed for remote Kerberos priciples?

Joshua,
will the IU UID/GID feature correctly handle mapping of UID/GID entries in ACLs on both the client and server? IMHO, this should be transparent, and I'm not even sure why lsetfacl and rsetfacl are needed. From reading the attached HLD, it appears that rsetfacl is needed to allow users in one mapping to access files from users in a different mapping? To me this seems like a possible security hole. Instead, it seems to me the remote user should get an entry in each mapping.

Hopefully we can get some more understanding of these commands and come to a clean solution for both Kerberos and UIDmap.

Comment by Andreas Dilger [ 09/Oct/21 ]

The lsetfacl and rsetfacl commands have been removed.

Generated at Sat Feb 10 01:37:47 UTC 2024 using Jira 9.4.14#940014-sha1:734e6822bbf0d45eff9af51f82432957f73aa32c.