| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 00:09:29 -0400 From: Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com> To: Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de> Cc: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, aeb@....nl, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com> Subject: Re: Why aren't partitions limited to fit within the device? On Oct 15, 2006, at 20:08:50, Neil Brown wrote: > Hmmm.. So Alan things a partially-outside-this-disk partition > shouldn't show up at all, and Andries thinks it should. > And both give reasonably believable justifications. > > Maybe we need a kernel parameter? How about this? > > [...snip...] > So provide a kernel-parameter which a 'safe' default. > > partitions=strict > is the default > partitions=relaxed > means that partitions are clipped rather than rejected. > This kernel parameters only applies to auto-detected partitions, > not those set by ioctl. Perhaps it should also support partitions=none; so that those of us who want to use a small userspace program and device-mapper to do the partition discovery and access may do so without worrying about how the kernel perceives the partitions (if at all). It also makes it fairly trivial to add support for entirely new parition types without having to modify the kernel at all. Cheers, Kyle Moffett - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists