From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Oct 3 01:53:35 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 494BF16A4CF for ; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 01:53:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from kane.otenet.gr (kane.otenet.gr [195.170.0.27]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A42443D1D for ; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 01:53:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from keramida@freebsd.org) Received: from gothmog.gr (patr530-b221.otenet.gr [212.205.244.229]) i931rN9T010655; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 04:53:24 +0300 Received: from gothmog.gr (gothmog [127.0.0.1]) by gothmog.gr (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id i931rL5V003287; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 04:53:21 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from keramida@freebsd.org) Received: (from giorgos@localhost) by gothmog.gr (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id i931rLfv003286; Sun, 3 Oct 2004 04:53:21 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from keramida@freebsd.org) Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 04:53:21 +0300 From: Giorgos Keramidas To: "M. Warner Losh" Message-ID: <20041003015321.GA3190@gothmog.gr> References: <20041002175517.GA2230@gothmog.gr> <20041002204851.K24332@fw.reifenberger.com> <20041002210554.GS35869@seekingfire.com> <20041002.192951.35870461.imp@bsdimp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041002.192951.35870461.imp@bsdimp.com> cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Protection from the dreaded "rm -fr /" X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 01:53:35 -0000 On 2004-10-02 19:29, "M. Warner Losh" wrote: > In message: <20041002210554.GS35869@seekingfire.com> > Tillman Hodgson writes: > : It'll never work, though, that's the thing. At some point it'll rm > : something it itself needs and error out. There isn't a way to use `rm > : -rf /` that /doesn't/ result in foot-shooting. > > No. You are wrong. if you rm -rf in a chroot, then it won't result > in foot shooting, necessarily, like it would outside a chroot. Since a chroot can always be rm -fr deleted from outside the chroot, this isn't really a great problem, is it?