Bryan Henderson wrote:
other times you talk about a filesystem that can be updated, ...
NO updating is possible.
I'm still not convinced you mean that, because the example you give is
specifically of a file that becomes immutable after some writing to it.
How about creating a new file?
Yes - always allowed.
That is a filesystem update. Do you want
to allow that? How about directory modifications, such as rename and
unlink?
Creating directories - always allowed. Modification - rename/unlink
etc will be disallowed.
Yeah, that's what the bad guy will do. So you haven't prevented someone
from undetectably modifying previously written data.
This is the only difference between the current discussion, and the
hardware WORM storage solution u mentioned in the previous email, due to
it software vs hardware implementation aspect. I have also found this:
ftp://reports.stanford.edu/pub/cstr/reports/cs/tr/87/1177/CS-TR-87-1177.pdf
Well, I would like to thank you and Matthew for the discussion (I think
using the printer is not advisable - the output is not really so
immutable after all - JUST reprint the modified content will do.
Similarly for WORM storage medium - just write into another CD.)
U agree with me?. Sorry for the rubbish talk :-).
Anyway, I shall attempt to write some proof-of-concept patches to try
out the idea. I may fail.
Thanks.
--
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
