linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] ext4: check incompatible mount options when mounting ext2/3

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 23 Nov 2012 14:20:09 -0200
From:	Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@...hat.com>
To:	Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@...hat.com>
Cc:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>, "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: check incompatible mount options when mounting
 ext2/3

Hi, sorry my delayed answer on this thread.

> >Anyway, back to my main point:  As a guiding principle I think I would
> >say that mount -t ext3 with ext4.ko should hard-reject any option not
> >understood by ext3.ko.  It's clear and predictable, and should make for
> >a decent first cut.
> >
> >-Eric
> 
> Agreed (sounds almost like we had coordinated our answers before I
> spoke to Ted in Barcelona!).
> 
> Ric
> 
that's my main point, and the goal of my first patch. I was thinking in just
warn when mounting a ext3 with ext4.ko using mount options not recognized by
ext3.ko, but, looks like hard-reject these options looks more reasonable than
just warning.

I'm going to re-write the patch using this approach. Is there any concern in
take this direction from any part here?

-- 
Carlos
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html