Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-users-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 21960 invoked from network); 2 Aug 2010 16:22:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 2 Aug 2010 16:22:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 19873 invoked by uid 500); 2 Aug 2010 16:22:33 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jackrabbit-users-archive@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 19788 invoked by uid 500); 2 Aug 2010 16:22:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@jackrabbit.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@jackrabbit.apache.org Received: (qmail 19779 invoked by uid 99); 2 Aug 2010 16:22:32 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 02 Aug 2010 16:22:32 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of aklimets@day.com designates 207.126.148.96 as permitted sender) Received: from [207.126.148.96] (HELO eu3sys201amo012.postini.com) (207.126.148.96) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Mon, 02 Aug 2010 16:22:26 +0000 Received: from source ([74.125.82.47]) by eu3sys201aob106.postini.com ([207.126.154.11]) with SMTP ID DSNKTFbwqp6+VgTefFFTYpjIbq12W+VgTsye@postini.com; Mon, 02 Aug 2010 09:22:05 PDT Received: by wwb34 with SMTP id 34so133435wwb.16 for ; Mon, 02 Aug 2010 09:22:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.148.79 with SMTP id o15mr5163850wbv.150.1280766122565; Mon, 02 Aug 2010 09:22:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.227.131.21 with HTTP; Mon, 2 Aug 2010 09:22:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4C56D3DF.8060003@day.com> References: <2ABE8089-E82D-4290-BD63-89A7A02C858C@prowse.com> <4C56D3DF.8060003@day.com> Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2010 18:22:02 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: ACL Order reversed? From: Alexander Klimetschek To: users@jackrabbit.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 16:19, Angela Schreiber wrote: > >> I think so, because DENY wins over ALLOW entries in general. > > no, that's not true. Then only in case the ACL of an ancestor node defining a DENY, which would win over any ALLOW in the tree below? But not inside a single access control list? Regards, Alex -- Alexander Klimetschek alexander.klimetschek@day.com