From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Aug 28 9:57:29 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.venon.com (ns1.venon.com [64.7.7.83]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 653EE37B423 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 09:57:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from megalomaniac.biosys.net (megalomaniac.venon.com [64.7.7.82]) by ns1.venon.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9200D1430 for ; Mon, 28 Aug 2000 12:59:38 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20000828125841.00b1d728@mail.megapathdsl.net> X-Sender: alle@mail.megapathdsl.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 13:00:24 -0400 To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG From: Asymmetric Subject: Re: NFS client ignores "read-only" attribute on file In-Reply-To: <20000828165206.AFA527C57@yellow.rahul.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 09:52 08/28/2000 -0700, Rahul Dhesi wrote: > From a philosphical perspective, I'm not sure that the above is correct. >NFS was designed to work properly only with trusted clients that are >under the same administrative control as the NFS server. Hmm.. didn't know that.. but from a sanity perspective still.. what restrictions are there on anyone writing their own goofy nfs client? -------signature file------- "'There comes a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part; you can't even passively take part, and you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop. And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you're free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!" -Mario Savio- Founder of the Free Speech Movement. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message