From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Jun 6 2:34:42 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from haldjas.folklore.ee (Haldjas.folklore.ee [193.40.6.121]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B83B37B6E3 for ; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 02:34:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee) Received: from localhost (narvi@localhost) by haldjas.folklore.ee (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA24359; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 11:33:46 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 11:33:46 +0200 (EET) From: Narvi To: Brett Glass Cc: Giorgos Keramidas , "Thomas M. Sommers" , freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Undelete in Unix (Was: Re: Why encourage stupid people to use *BSD) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20000605142053.04aa2ee0@localhost> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, 5 Jun 2000, Brett Glass wrote: > At 03:10 AM 6/5/2000, Narvi wrote: > > >I don't know how they implemented it - but I would start with a daemon > >running as root to which both the "delete" and "undelete" commands speak > >to. > > I'd do it with an lkm that hooked syscalls. > But that provides more than most things under NT - guranteed undelete of any file, no matter how deleted. Hooking unlink also produces a lot of problems, especially if the user runs any suid programs, esp. if those happen to use temporary files... > --Brett > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message