linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Shadow directories

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:	Fri, 19 Oct 2007 12:27:16 +0930
From:	David Newall <david@...idnewall.com>
To:	Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>
CC:	jaroslav.sykora@...il.com,
	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] Shadow directories

Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 06:07:45AM +0930, David Newall wrote:
>   
>>> considerations of this whole scheme. Linux, like most Unix systems, 
>>> has never allowed hard links to directories for a number of reasons;
>>>       
>> The claim is wrong.  UNIX systems have traditionally allowed the 
>> superuser to create hard links to directories.  See link(2) for 2.10BSD 
>> <http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/man.cgi?query=link&sektion=2&manpath=2.10+BSD>. 
>> Having got that wrong throws doubt on the argument; perhaps a path can 
>> simultaneously be a file and a directory.
>>     
>
> Learn to read.  Linux has never allowed that.  Most of the Unix systems
> do not allow that.

I did read the claim and it is ambiguous, in that it can reasonably be 
read to mean that most UNIX systems never allowed such links, which is 
wrong.  All UNIX systems allowed it until relatively recently.
-
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/