From owner-freebsd-security Sat May 22 8:11:42 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.204.136.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E64914D93 for ; Sat, 22 May 1999 08:11:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [195.204.143.218]) by ns1.yes.no (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA11887; Sat, 22 May 1999 17:11:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id RAA00583; Sat, 22 May 1999 17:11:38 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 17:11:38 +0200 From: Eivind Eklund To: Thomas Valentino Crimi Cc: brooks@one-eyed-alien.net, Dag-Erling Smorgrav , "Ilmar S. Habibulin" , posix1e@cyrus.watson.org, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: secure deletion Message-ID: <19990522171138.K85583@bitbox.follo.net> References: <19990521201043.I85583@bitbox.follo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.1i In-Reply-To: ; from Thomas Valentino Crimi on Fri, May 21, 1999 at 03:34:56PM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, May 21, 1999 at 03:34:56PM -0400, Thomas Valentino Crimi wrote: > Excerpts from mail: 21-May-99 Re: secure deletion by Eivind Eklund@FreeBSD.OR > > Either tunefs or chflags - it would be relatively expensive, so if you > > only need it for some data, it is probably better to have more > > fine-grained control than per-FS. > > Might I also suggest a 'normal' user option for one particular file to > be securely wiped? It is not possibly to securely delete a file after data has been written to it unless the wish to do so has been indicated to the kernel from the start of the file's life time. We do de-fragmentation while the FS is running (or at least that's what I understood the dorealloc code to do). Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message