From owner-freebsd-fs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 16 12:15:08 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1510916A479 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:15:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pabmara@fiv.upv.es) Received: from smtp.upv.es (84-123-2-197.onocable.ono.com [84.123.2.197]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F3A9B43D46 for ; Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:15:06 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from pabmara@fiv.upv.es) Received: (qmail 28944 invoked by uid 1000); 16 Jun 2006 12:15:35 -0000 Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 14:15:35 +0200 From: Pablo =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mar=EDn_Ram=F3n?= To: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org Message-ID: <20060616121535.GA28485@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Subject: FFS data integrity X-BeenThere: freebsd-fs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Filesystems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 12:15:08 -0000 (I didn't know this mailing list and I sent this message to freebsd-questions@ about 2 hours ago. It's more on-topic here, so I crosspost it. Sorry for the inconveniences.) Here goes a newbie question about classical FFS (without softupdates). As metadata is updated synchronously, can an i-node, at some point, end pointing to not written yet data blocks? Is this a security risk, i.e., can those pointed to data blocks pertain to another user's deleted on memory but not deleted on disk data, or that deleted data will be marked in metadata as not initialized and after a crash fsck will fix all i-nodes pointing to it? AFAIK, softupdates and ext3 in the default mode (data=ordered) don't have this problem, but journalling filesystems that journal only metadata do. Is this correct? Thanks in advance.