On Mon, 30 Oct 2006 09:20:41 +0000
Ceri Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 08:00:54PM +1100, Peter Jeremy wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-Oct-30 03:32:09 +0000, Xin LI wrote:
> > >  Be more reasonable when overwrite mode is specified while there
> > >  is hard links.  Overwritting when links > 1 would cause data
> > >  loss, which is usually undesired.
> > 
> > Another way of looking at it is that not overwriting when links > 1
> > means that the data I thought I securely deleted is still present
> > somewhere on my computer and I have no easy way to find it.

        find /mountpoint -type f -inum <inode_number>

> > I believe that this change creates a security hole and should be
> > reverted.  It the user specified '-P', either the file should be
> > over-written or the file should be left untouched (not deleted).
> 
> Peter, I fully agree with you.  It looks like you are asking for
> what's been implemented though; with this change, the file is not
> overwritten when multiple links exist.

But I too agree that this maybe should be backed out until it is
further discussed. I wasn't aware of the capabilities of our ln(1)
when I suggested the patch.

        Joerg
-- 
| /"\   ASCII ribbon   |  GnuPG Key ID | e86d b753 3deb e749 6c3a |
| \ / campaign against |    0xbbcaad24 | 5706 1f7d 6cfd bbca ad24 |
|  X    HTML in email  |        .the next sentence is true.       |
| / \     and news     |     .the previous sentence was a lie.    |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to