[squid-dev] A new 'has' ACL

[Alex Rousskov]

On 04/30/2017 10:03 PM, Amos Jeffries wrote:

> Is there an explicit need you have found for ALE to be on the
> component list? Since ALE is currently standing in as a "master
> transaction" object for most of the Squid code. It needs to be either
> created or provided/fetched from elsewhere whenever it is used.
> Having an ACL that bypasses that would defeat bug-finding of places
> where it is broken.

I would like to polish that question and correct its justification
logic: We can abuse admins as bug-finding guinea pigs only if we give
them tools to turn those bugs off. The "has" ACL is such a tool. Thus,
we need a "has" ACL component for any object that any ACL or ACL-driven
code uses (or should be using) conditionally. Hence, the question is:

Does Squid ACL or ACL-driven code correctly use (or should be using) ALE
conditionally?

If the answer is "yes", then ALE should be added to "has". If the answer
is "maybe", then ALE may be added to "has".

Please note that it is not necessary to have a specific crash or warning
bug report for the answer to become "yes" or "maybe", justifying ALE
support in the "has" ACL. Squid code analysis is sufficient.

I cannot answer that question without doing more research, but I am sure
Eduard can find the right answer.


Thank you,

Alex.