<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed version="0.3" xmlns="http://purl.org/atom/ns#">
<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://neil.brown.name/blog/unixerrors"/>

<title>unixerrors</title>
<modified>2004-12-06T17:02:40Z</modified>
<author></author>
<entry>
<title>Where Unix went wrong - filesystems - access control</title>
<issued>2004-12-06T17:02:40Z</issued>
<modified>2004-12-06T17:02:40Z</modified>
<id>http://neil.brown.name/blog/20041206170240</id>
<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://neil.brown.name/blog/20041206170240"/>
<content type="text/html" mode="escaped">
This is one in a (possible) series where I complain about design decisions in Unix.   Unix has, on the whole, a very good design, so mistakes stand out rather clearly.

&lt;p&gt;Today's article looks at &amp;quot;Access Control&amp;quot; for files.  The &amp;quot;ugo&amp;quot; access control in Unix doesn't seem all that bad until you look at the generalisation known as ACLs - access control lists.  Once you see them you have to realise that something was fundamentally wrong to start with.
&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=http://neil.brown.name/blog/20041206170240&gt;read more...(6 comments)&lt;/a&gt;</content>
</entry>

</feed>

