Hi!

> >The last time: your change does not increase security. Sigh... Andrea,
> 
> You say again for the open(2) issue? As I just said the open(2) is
> possible only due the lazyness of not having implemented revoke(2) yet.
> 
> Just because fixing hardlinks is not enough it doesn't mean it's in the
> wrong direction.

revoke() is needed anyway (for /dev/vcsa, /dev/sound, /dev/fb0 for
example), so I guess

*) first implement revoke()

*) then talk about this issue again

I still think that adding feature to truncate file before deletion
into rm would make you happy, Andrea. That handles both open() and
link() cases nicely.

                                                                Pavel
PS: That new switch to rm looks really nice, think about it.
-- 
I'm really [EMAIL PROTECTED] Look at http://195.113.31.123/~pavel.  Pavel
Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!

Reply via email to