On Mon, 18 June 2007 18:10:21 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2007 at 02:31:14PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > And that makes them different from extended attributes, how? > > > > Both of these really are nothing but ad hocky syntactic sugar for > > directories, sometimes combined with in-filesystem support for small > > data items. > > There's a good discussion of the issues involved in my LCA 2006 > presentation.... which doesn't seem to be on the LCA 2006 site. Hrm. > I'll have to ask that this be fixed. In any case, here it is: > > http://thunk.org/tytso/forkdepot.odp The main difference appears to be the potential size. Both extended attributes and forks allow for extra data that I neither want or need. But once the extra space is large enough to hide a rootkit in, it becomes a security problem instead of just something pointless. Pointless here means that _I_ don't see the point. Maybe there are valid uses for extended attributes. If there are, noone has explained them to me yet. Jörn -- They laughed at Galileo. They laughed at Copernicus. They laughed at Columbus. But remember, they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. -- unknown - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
