From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 12 May 2002 15:02:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 12 May 2002 15:02:04 -0400 Received: from unthought.net ([212.97.129.24]:37784 "HELO mail.unthought.net") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sun, 12 May 2002 15:02:02 -0400 Date: Sun, 12 May 2002 21:02:02 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jakob_=D8stergaard?= To: Elladan Cc: Alexander Viro , Kasper Dupont , Linux-Kernel Subject: Re: [RFC] ext2 and ext3 block reservations can be bypassed Message-ID: <20020512210202.B17334@unthought.net> Mail-Followup-To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jakob_=D8stergaard?= , Elladan , Alexander Viro , Kasper Dupont , Linux-Kernel In-Reply-To: <20020512103432.A24018@eskimo.com> <20020512113730.A24085@eskimo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, May 12, 2002 at 11:37:30AM -0700, Elladan wrote: ... Ok, thanks for the explanation earlier in the thread. I was mistaken. > > Regardless of whether it's a good thing to depend on security-wise, it > is a problem to have something that appears to be a security feature > which doesn't actually work. ... > Having unsupported security features is typically a bad idea. I guess the point is that it is not a security feature. The 5% default is good for ext2, since the filesystem will get heavily fragmented if you fill it up more than ~95%. So it is a convenience feature. -- ................................................................ : jakob@unthought.net : And I see the elder races, : :.........................: putrid forms of man : : Jakob Østergaard : See him rise and claim the earth, : : OZ9ABN : his downfall is at hand. : :.........................:............{Konkhra}...............: