From owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 10 11:07:57 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F01037B401; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:07:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from HAL9000.homeunix.com (ip114.bella-vista.sfo.interquest.net [66.199.86.114]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61A1343F75; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:07:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from das@freebsd.org) Received: from HAL9000.homeunix.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by HAL9000.homeunix.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h5AI7jPB016867; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:07:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from das@freebsd.org) Received: (from das@localhost) by HAL9000.homeunix.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h5AI7jLA016866; Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:07:45 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from das@freebsd.org) Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:07:45 -0700 From: David Schultz To: Michael Sierchio Message-ID: <20030610180745.GA16845@HAL9000.homeunix.com> Mail-Followup-To: Michael Sierchio , Robert Watson , security@freebsd.org References: <20030608080429.GA234@hhos.serious.ld> <20030610103830.GC14407@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <3EE5EF0A.7060703@tenebras.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3EE5EF0A.7060703@tenebras.com> cc: Robert Watson cc: security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Removable media security in FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-security@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Security issues [members-only posting] List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 18:07:57 -0000 On Tue, Jun 10, 2003, Michael Sierchio wrote: > David Schultz wrote: > > >FAT is somewhat less robust than UFS. ... > > That is possibly the most subtle funny thing I have read > all day. "An orange crate is somewhat less robust than > a Humvee" is how I read that. :-) In this case, I was referring specifically to bugs in our present implementation, not to the filesystem itself. The overall design certainly deserves stronger words.