CentOS 6.x

In the process of studying ACLs, I came across this blurb in my training documentation:

However with ACLs, you can't deny access for a user to his home directory

While I can't think of any reason why I would want to do that, I'm curious why administrators are explicitly blocked from even having the possibility of doing this. Is this something that's hard-coded into setfacl or is something else blocking this from happening?


There is nothing special about a user's home directory that would make permissions different. After all, permissions are handled by the kernel, and the kernel has no concept of home directory.

A user's home directory usually belongs to that user. An ACL for the owner of the file is ignored, the classical permission bits for the owner (set by chmod u=…) apply instead. I guess this is what this document is illustrating in a clumsy way.

If you make a user's home directory not executable by that user, then they will be left in the root directory when they log in.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.