Date: Wed, 14 Aug 1996 12:21:10 -0500 (CDT) From: Joe Greco <jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com> To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert) Cc: jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com, ulf@lamb.net, jkh@time.cdrom.com, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Nightmare. Message-ID: <199608141721.MAA12196@brasil.moneng.mei.com> In-Reply-To: <199608141710.KAA29273@phaeton.artisoft.com> from "Terry Lambert" at Aug 14, 96 10:10:48 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > 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? > > Yes. Disable the raw device for mounted disks. The stacking > architecture disallows (since it internall references the vnodes) a > device level soloution that does anything to the non-raw device. > > If we can get past the point where devfs is a mandatory item, then we > can fix all of this without breaking FS stacking. There is no soloution > otherwise that could not be broken by a clever idiot. Would it make more sense to just disable _writes_ to raw devices for mounted disks? (probably writes to both devices, for that matter) I am thinking specifically of using dump,dd,etc to read a mounted file system for some useful purpose. ... JG
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199608141721.MAA12196>