linux-kernel - Re: [RFC/PATCH] revoke/frevoke system calls V2

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-Id: <20060807101745.61f21826.froese@gmx.de>
Date:	Mon, 7 Aug 2006 10:17:45 +0200
From:	Edgar Toernig <froese@....de>
To:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Cc:	Pekka J Enberg <penberg@...Helsinki.FI>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...l.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	tytso@....edu, tigran@...itas.com
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] revoke/frevoke system calls V2

Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> > This patch implements the revoke(2) and frevoke(2) system calls for
> > all types of files. The operation is done in passes: first we replace
> 
> 
> Do we need revoke()? open()+frevoke() should be fast enough, no?

Why do we need [f]revoke at all?  As it doesn't implement the
BSD semantic I can't see why it's better than fuser -k.

Ciao, ET.
-
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/