[DGD] Re: Alternatives to the Kernel model of security...

[Felix A. Croes]

Noah Gibbs <noah_gibbs at yahoo.com> wrote:

> --- Par Winzell <zell at skotos.net> wrote:
> > The 'cadaver' client, which Dworkin has already
> > mentioned, is what you 
> > should compare FTP against.
>
>   Only if you can get editors (I'm thinking vi and
> emacs) to edit using it.  You can do that with FTP.
>
>   But more to the point, I'm saying that having the
> target users install a filesystem on Linux isn't
> really an option.  A WebDAV filesystem was one
> suggested solution to the problem of having
> builders/admins use existing editors remotely on LPC
> source files and DGD data files.  You're right that
> it's no easier for any non-WebDAV filesystem, but
> that's not really the point.  A solution that doesn't
> involve installing *any* new filesystem on Linux would
> be necessary.

A Linux user who installs Phantasmal might not want to install davfs2,
but he's not likely to have less than full access to the mudlib anyhow.
Anyone else can use ftp or cadaver or whatever.

It seems to me that your security system only needs a way to pick up
new objects, which are always introduced from outside the mud by
someone with full access.

By the way, the kernel library already has a similar problem, since
it keeps track of a file quota for each programmer.

Regards,
Dworkin
_________________________________________________________________
List config page:  http://list.imaginary.com/mailman/listinfo/dgd