lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Jul]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [Ext2-devel] Re: Shrinking ext3 directories
    Date
    On Thursday 04 July 2002 16:15, jlnance@intrex.net wrote:
    > On Thu, Jul 04, 2002 at 06:48:45AM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote:
    > > > behaviour under certain application workloads. With the half-md4, at
    > > > least we can expect decent worst-case behaviour unless we're under
    > > > active attack (ie. only maliscious apps get hurt).
    > >
    > > OK, anti-hash-attack is on the list of things to do, and it's fairly
    > > clear how to go about it:
    >
    > Is it really worth the trouble and complexity to do anti-hash-attack?
    > What is the worst that could happen if someone managed to create a bunch
    > of files that hashed to the same value?

    Just a slowdown, but in some cases it could be a quadratic slowdown
    that could conceivably be turned into a denial of service. As risks
    go, it's a minor one, but there's a straightforward solution with
    insignificant cost in either efficiency or code size, so why not do
    it. The overhead is just a data move from the superblock per name
    hash.

    --
    Daniel
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:27    [W:5.883 / U:0.064 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site