On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 08:41:00 +0200 Sebastian Dransfeld <s...@tango.flipp.net> said:
> On 09/25/2012 06:01 PM, rustyBSD wrote: > > Le 25/09/2012 15:57, Sebastian Dransfeld a écrit : > >> Something like this (untested!!). > > Hi, > > I use malloc() because OpenBSD's secure rm > > uses malloc too. > > > > I'm not sure mmap() is good, but I'll read some > > documentation. > > > > In all cases, your patch doesn't work, as > > eina_file_map_all() give a read access. So > > we can't write randomized data to the file > > (PROT_READ). > > True, Didn't check that. > > I checked the openbsd source, and they limit the size of the malloc and > do several passes if the whole file size can't be malloc'ed. > > And I think mmap is fine: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_dynamic_memory_allocation#OpenBSD.27s_malloc and that's what i did. a fixed buffer of 64kb is malloced - and random filled or 0xff filled as per before - but just written 64k at a time. and yes - it handles the tail that may not be a full 64k too. here's the question... this is pretty lame security-wise. shouldn't we be military/cia/nsa spec and overwrite it at least 7 times? :) oh and this will probably/possible get screwed by logging fs's or flash media that may shuffle the blocks around on write :) ie it wont help. anyway... why not do it 7 times and then we can say "not even the cia can get your warez after this!" :) -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) ras...@rasterman.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;258768047;13503038;j? http://info.appdynamics.com/FreeJavaPerformanceDownload.html _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
