Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 29 Dec 1997 20:46:35 +0200 (GMT-2) | From | Yuri Kuzmenko <> | Subject | Re: 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!
| |