[lkml]   [1997]   [Dec]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: hardlinks.... sucks... ;-(
> > No, you are not right ;-( There is old Unix hole and you know it. And it's
> > a kernel vfs issue. In general, this is *huge* hole. Novice in
> > sysadmin's world can done this "not kernel issue":
> Its not a kernel issue, its a "administrator lacks clues and tools dont help
> me" issue.

Alan, I don't know you work, but my work designed with administration of
many users any several admistrators. I don't garantie that other admins
don't cause this problem. Therefore I have decided for patch the kernel.
If this patch will not be included with kernel, I will patch any new
version of kernel for me. Also, see next peace of namei.c:
* Hardlinks are often used in delicate situations. We avoid
* security-related surprises by not following symlinks on the
* newname. We *do* follow them on the oldname. This is
* the same as Digital Unix 4.0, for example.
* Solaris 2.5.1 is similar, but for a laugh try linking from
* a dangling symlink. --KAB
There is a security problem. And my situation is security problem *too*.

2EE&VS: молчать! плиз!

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:40    [W:0.077 / U:2.652 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site