None of those issues are of the form “a hundred bad bytes will permanently and irrevocably destroy all data on your entire disk”. Unless I am mistaken, crypto header corruption is.
On Jan 05 22:22:44, n.carr...@alum.utoronto.ca wrote: > Given that one of the goals of the OpenBSD project is to produce > reliable documentation, I would have expected that this kind of potential > corruption would have been at least mentioned > somewhere. Surely we don’t expect every user to read the code for > all the software they use to be sure there are no well-known but > undocumented data holes? If a ffs's superblocks get corrupted, the fs will be unusable. If a file's inode gets corrupted, the file will bu unusable. Should this be mentioned in the respective manpages? Also, libc.so corruption will break all dynamicaly linked binaries. And if /bsd gets corrupted, the system will be unbootable. Are these undocumented data holes? Are you distressed to find so potentially huge an issue completely undocumented? Jan > Even just a line like this would be useful: > > “Note: bioctl(8) writes header information (such as salt values for > crypto volumes) at the start of the original partition. See [relevant source > file] for details. If this information should become corrupted, the > softraid(4) > volume will become unusable.” > > Thanks! > Nathan > > PS I have been using OpenBSD since 2010. I like it very much in many > ways, but I am distressed to find so potentially huge an issue completely > undocumented. > >
