| To: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: XFS information leak during crash |
| From: | Jan Kasprzak <kas@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 3 Nov 2005 01:03:17 +0100 |
| Cc: | linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20051103104956.B6081538@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20051102212722.GC6759@xxxxxxxxxx> <20051103101107.O6239737@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20051102233629.GD6759@xxxxxxxxxx> <20051103104956.B6081538@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4.1i |
Nathan Scott wrote:
: XFS behaves as most filesystems do and
: will write over the top of existing data.
OK, thanks for the clarification.
: XFS also rewrites files in-place. You will never get someone else's
: current data (that would be metadata corruption...),
Of course.
: it would only
: ever be uninitialised, previously-free space.
Yes, but an old data from previously deleted files
(sendmail's temporary files, vim save files, etc) may contain
a sensitive information.
-Y.
--
| Jan "Yenya" Kasprzak <kas at {fi.muni.cz - work | yenya.net - private}> |
| GPG: ID 1024/D3498839 Fingerprint 0D99A7FB206605D7 8B35FCDE05B18A5E |
| http://www.fi.muni.cz/~kas/ Journal: http://www.fi.muni.cz/~kas/blog/ |
> Specs are a basis for _talking_about_ things. But they are _not_ a basis <
> for implementing software. --Linus Torvalds <
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: XFS information leak during crash, Nathan Scott |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: XFS information leak during crash, Nathan Scott |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: XFS information leak during crash, Nathan Scott |
| Next by Thread: | Re: XFS information leak during crash, Nathan Scott |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |