Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261841AbTKBVnD (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Nov 2003 16:43:03 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261842AbTKBVnD (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Nov 2003 16:43:03 -0500 Received: from thebsh.namesys.com ([212.16.7.65]:10418 "HELO thebsh.namesys.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261841AbTKBVnA (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Nov 2003 16:43:00 -0500 Message-ID: <3FA57A62.7020402@namesys.com> Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 00:42:58 +0300 From: Hans Reiser User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "David S. Miller" CC: tytso@mit.edu, andersen@codepoet.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Things that Longhorn seems to be doing right References: <3F9F7F66.9060008@namesys.com> <20031029224230.GA32463@codepoet.org> <20031030015212.GD8689@thunk.org> <3FA0C631.6030905@namesys.com> <20031030174809.GA10209@thunk.org> <3FA16545.6070704@namesys.com> <20031030203146.GA10653@thunk.org> <3FA211D3.2020008@namesys.com> <20031031193016.GA1546@thunk.org> <3FA2CA5E.3050308@namesys.com> <20031031130833.42788aec.davem@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20031031130833.42788aec.davem@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1298 Lines: 45 David S. Miller wrote: >On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 23:47:26 +0300 >Hans Reiser wrote: > > > >>If you say that names resolve to single objects and never should >>resolve to sets of objects, we disagree. >> >> > >While I have no personal opinion either way on the utility of such an >idea, I do think that if we ever do support a "one to many" mapping of >names to inodes we should make you do the security audit of a full >Linux system in the presence of this feature, deal? :-) > > > > ;-) I don't know how seriously you desire me to take your comment, so forgive me if I take it too seriously. You can't upgrade existing APIs to handle sets of inodes without changing them in ways that require source code modification, so one can presume that the app writer used the new APIs as correctly as he performs all his other changes to his code. Agreed? Of course, bash would be much more secure if we got rid of globbing (*), yes? Ted, can you write and send a patch in to the bash maintainer for that? ;-) -- Hans - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/