From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265100AbUBDX5b (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Feb 2004 18:57:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265118AbUBDXzQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Feb 2004 18:55:16 -0500 Received: from www.trustcorps.com ([213.165.226.2]:21265 "EHLO raq1.nitrex.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265059AbUBDXya (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Feb 2004 18:54:30 -0500 Message-ID: <4021858F.1070405@hcunix.net> Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 23:51:43 +0000 From: the grugq User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bill Davidsen CC: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, "Theodore Ts'o" , Pavel Machek , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: PATCH - ext2fs privacy (i.e. secure deletion) patch References: Your message of "Wed, 04 Feb 2004 12:05:07 EST." <40212643.4000104@tmr.com> <200402041714.i14HEIVD005246@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> <402184AA.2010302@tmr.com> In-Reply-To: <402184AA.2010302@tmr.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.82.4.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > But what happens when the 'setgid' bit is put on a directory? At least > in 2.4 existing files do NOT get the group set, only files newly > created. So unless someone feels that's a bug which needs immediate > fixing, I can point to it as a model by which the feature could be > practically implemented. > > Comment? > > So the proposal is specifically: if a directory has its chattr 's' "bit" set, then all newly created files within that directory inherit the chattr 's' "bit". Personally, I think that extends beyond simply privacy protection, and addresses how chattr values are handled by the file system. Privacy protection wouldn't affect the way in which the chattr values are handled, so if they are inherited through directories then fine... but I don't see this as specific to secure deletion. --gq