[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080818185332.202b32f0@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 18:53:32 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: davecb@....com
Cc: tvrtko.ursulin@...hos.com, Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>, capibara@...all.nl,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>, david@...g.hm,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
malware-list@...ts.printk.net,
malware-list-bounces@...sg.printk.net,
Mihai Don??u <mdontu@...defender.com>,
Peter Dolding <oiaohm@...il.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>,
rmeijer@...all.nl
Subject: Re: [malware-list] scanner interface proposal was: [TALPA] Intro to
a linux interface for on access scanning
> I suspect we're saying "on close" when what's really meant is
> "opened for write". In the latter case, the notification would tell
> the user-space program to watch for changes, possibly by something as
> simple as doing a stat now and another when it gets around to
Or more precisely perhaps "on the file becoming dirty". A program that
opens for write, computes for an hour and writes out doesn't want to load
events down until it begins writing.
I agree "on close" is inaccurate for the scanner cases and that is why
we've been talking about events + a close time event.
> deciding if it should scan the file. I see lots of room for
> user-space alternatives for change detection, depending on how much
> state it keeps. Rsync-like, perhaps?
Agreed.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists