linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fs: exFAT read-only driver GPL implementation by Paragon Software.

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: <20191021114556.lk2zkha57xmav7xz@pali>
Date:   Mon, 21 Oct 2019 13:45:56 +0200
From:   Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>
To:     Maurizio Lombardi <mlombard@...hat.com>
Cc:     Konstantin Komarov <almaz.alexandrovich@...agon-software.com>,
        "viro@...iv.linux.org.uk" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs: exFAT read-only driver GPL implementation by Paragon
 Software.

On Monday 21 October 2019 13:37:13 Maurizio Lombardi wrote:
> So, 2 FAT tables are probably not sufficient for recovery, 2 bitmaps are needed too.

Yes, I know. But code which I referred check both number of fat tables
and number of allocation bitmaps (as they are represented by one member
in boot sector structure).

> Btw, only Windows CE supported this.

Is this information based on some real tests? Or just from marketing or
Microsoft's information? (I would really like to know definite answer in
this area).

Because Microsoft says one thing in their FAT32 specification, second
thing described in their FAT implementation and thing thing is how it is
really implemented (in fatfast.sys kernel driver which is open source).

So I would be really careful about how MS's exfat.sys implementation is
working.

-- 
Pali Rohár
pali.rohar@...il.com