Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 18:59:33 +0100 From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@yes.no> To: Charles Owens <owensc@enc.edu>, hackers list FreeBSD <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG> Cc: braam@cs.cmu.edu Subject: Re: Coda FS: FBSD port done!, but development favors Linux Message-ID: <19980212185933.22479@follo.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.980212112548.17150D-100000@itsdsv2.enc.edu>; from Charles Owens on Thu, Feb 12, 1998 at 12:03:36PM -0500 References: <Pine.BSF.3.95q.980212112548.17150D-100000@itsdsv2.enc.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Feb 12, 1998 at 12:03:36PM -0500, Charles Owens wrote: > * Development, particularly in the area of scalability, is focused on > Linux. Why? His stated reasons: > > * Linux's ext2fs filesystem is much faster than *BSD's ffs > (How good is FreeBSD's ext2fs support these days? Is > it in 2.2.6 or must we wait for 3.0?) ext2fs support is in 2.2.6, methinks. At least it is in LINT for RELENG_2_2 (from RELENG_2_2_0_RELEASE and up, actually). And ext2fs is AFAIK only faster due to the default blocksize and the fact that they violate a patented Novell technology. (Terry can say more on this; they either violate DOW-patents or run unsafe; I forget which...) > * Current work is being done to develop Linux kernel extensions that > will allow access to files via raw inodes. This development is > seen as key to allowing Coda to support large filespaces with > reasonable performance. See this URL for Peter's notes on > these extensions: > > http://telemann.coda.cs.cmu.edu/maillists/linux-coda/0225.html > > Peter was very interested in seeing FreeBSD development continue, but > regretted that he had no programmers to spare on creating similar FreeBSD > kernel extensions. Any reactions to this? I personally think that Coda > could be the greatest thing since sliced bread... we certainly don't want > FreeBSD to miss out. Does the idea of these kernel extensions making > their way into the FreeBSD kernel rub anyone the wrong way? Is there a > better way to go? I know we have a penchant for doing things the > "right" way. :-) It would take about 15 minutes to create this functionality, and it has been discussed before. It has been decided against on the basis of security. This break chroot() completely, and it break the protection you presently have when -rwxr-x--- src/ -rwxr-xr-x src/somefile - somefile will be available to an attacker. If this is what it takes to get Coda, I for one won't use it, but I can probably create and commit a kernel option that give the access methods so that others can. It will not be part of FreeBSD in the default configuration, at least not if I have any say in the matter. (Sorry to be so brutal, but it really kill a lot of security assumptions.) Eivind To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980212185933.22479>