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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sun, 19 Dec 2010 17:39:01 +0100
From:	Olaf van der Spek <>
To:	Calvin Walton <>
Cc:	Ric Wheeler <>,,
Subject: Re: Atomic non-durable file write API

On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 11:15 PM, Calvin Walton <> wrote:
> Hmm. I’m doing a little interpretation of what Olaf said here; but I
> think you may have misunderstood the question?
> He doesn’t care about whether or not the file is securely written to
> disk (durable); however he doesn’t want to see any partially written
> files. In other words, something like
>     1. Write to temp file
>     2. Rename temp file over original file

Meta data, including file owner, should be preserved.
Ideally, no temp files should be visible either.

> Where the rename is only committed to disk once the entire contents of
> the file have been written securely – whenever that may eventually
> happen.
> He doesn’t want to synchronously wait for the file to be written,
> because the new data isn’t particularly important. The only important
> thing is that the file either contains the old or new data after a
> filesystem crash; not incomplete data. So, it’s more of an ordering
> problem, I think? (Analogous to putting some sort of barrier between the
> file write/close and the file rename to maintain ordering.)
> Hopefully I’ve interpreted the original question correctly, because this
> is something I would find interesting as well.

Yes, you did.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists