linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/22][RFC] Unionfs: Stackable Namespace Unification Filesystem

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]

Date:	Mon, 04 Sep 2006 23:08:58 -0400
From:	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
To:	Shaya Potter <spotter@...columbia.edu>
Cc:	Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>, Josef Sipek <jsipek@...sunysb.edu>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	hch@...radead.org, akpm@...l.org, viro@....linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/22][RFC] Unionfs: Stackable Namespace Unification
	Filesystem

On Mon, 2006-09-04 at 09:28 -0400, Shaya Potter wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-09-03 at 11:05 +0000, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> > 
> > > - Modifying a Unionfs branch directly, while the union is mounted, is
> > >   currently unsupported.  Any such change may cause Unionfs to oops and it
> > >   can even result in data loss!
> > 
> > I'm not sure if that is acceptable. Even root user should be unable to
> > oops the kernel using 'normal' actions.
> 
> As I said in the other case.  imagine ext2/3 on a a san file system
> where 2 systems try to make use of it.  Will they not have issues?

Yes, but you are deliberately ignoring that NAS systems like CIFS or NFS
don't, and neither do clustered filesystems. Users of those systems
don't expect them to have issues with that sort of scenario.


-
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/