lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Aug]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: fanotify - overall design before I start sending patches
    >>>>> "Valdis" == Valdis Kletnieks <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu> writes:

    Valdis> On Tue, 04 Aug 2009 12:27:48 EDT, Eric Paris said:
    >> On Tue, 2009-08-04 at 17:09 +0100, Tvrtko Ursulin wrote:
    >> > Would it make more sense to deny on timeouts and then evict? I am thinking it
    >> > would be more secure with no significant drawbacks. Also for usages like HSM
    >> > allowing it without data being in place might present wrong content to the
    >> > user.
    >>
    >> I'd be willing to go that route as long as noone else complains.

    Valdis> Yes, in my world, "deny on timeout and evict" is the better
    Valdis> design decision. For an HSM, you'd rather have a
    Valdis> quick-and-ugly death on a failed file open than an app
    Valdis> accidentally reading the HSM's stub data thinking it's the
    Valdis> original data.

    Speaking as somone who is working slowly to deploy an HSM service, one
    thing to note is that when you *do* see the stub file contents, you
    know that your HSM is busted somehow.

    How will fanotify deal with this issue? Sorry, I haven't paid enough
    attention to this thread though I know I should since it's up my $WORK
    alley.

    John


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-08-04 20:23    [W:2.612 / U:0.052 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site