From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jamie Lokier Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Shared flags Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 03:37:12 +0000 Message-ID: <20081114033712.GL2055@shareable.org> References: <49183DF9.9010003@etersoft.ru> <20081111085211.GB2323@infradead.org> <20081111100940.GA8968@shareable.org> <20081111111428.GA18228@infradead.org> <491BFCBA.80208@etersoft.ru> <20081113092554.GA3004@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Pavel Shilovsky , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Return-path: Received: from mail2.shareable.org ([80.68.89.115]:41634 "EHLO mail2.shareable.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751427AbYKNDhX (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:37:23 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081113092554.GA3004@infradead.org> Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 01:08:58PM +0300, Pavel Shilovsky wrote: > > We suggest to switch on this flags with special options during mounting. > > By default, it'll be switch off. > > This solution deletes possibility of such situations, like in example. > > Sorry, having completely weird open modes only for one filesystem, and > only depending on mount options is not very nice to the user. > > And options or not allowing the above functionality for regular users > is a security issue. A generic mount option is currently used for mandatory locking - this is very similar. The only different I see, for security, is with mandatory locking a process which doesn't want to get stuck can check the permission bits before opening a file. But I'm not aware of anything actually doing this. -- Jamie