From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Aug 14 09:47:25 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id JAA13027
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 09:47:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from brasil.moneng.mei.com (brasil.moneng.mei.com [151.186.109.160])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id JAA13022
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 09:47:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from jgreco@localhost) by brasil.moneng.mei.com (8.7.Beta.1/8.7.Beta.1) id LAA12047; Wed, 14 Aug 1996 11:45:36 -0500
From: Joe Greco <jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com>
Message-Id: <199608141645.LAA12047@brasil.moneng.mei.com>
Subject: Re: Nightmare.
To: ulf@lamb.net (Ulf Zimmermann)
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 11:45:36 -0500 (CDT)
Cc: jkh@time.cdrom.com, hackers@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199608141602.JAA07816@Gatekeeper.Lamb.net> from "Ulf Zimmermann" at Aug 14, 96 09:02:28 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> I would go more into the direction of checking if the dump device is a
> mounted file system. Easy check. 

I tend to agree, but wonder if it would not make more sense to tackle this
from a different angle.

Consider all the programs that could clobber a mounted file system.  Would
it make more sense if we somehow protected a mounted disk device from
being clobbered?

I am sort of thinking of the way amd mounts its disk devices exclusively,
makes it difficult to get a dump, but effectively protects the device (well,
at least the normal device, not the raw device).

OTOH, this is a can of worms, no matter how you do it.

... JG