From owner-freebsd-security  Fri May 21 10:53: 6 1999
Delivered-To: freebsd-security@freebsd.org
Received: from flood.ping.uio.no (flood.ping.uio.no [129.240.78.31])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EE5115111
	for <freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG>; Fri, 21 May 1999 10:53:04 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from des@flood.ping.uio.no)
Received: (from des@localhost)
	by flood.ping.uio.no (8.9.3/8.9.1) id TAA80088;
	Fri, 21 May 1999 19:52:57 +0200 (CEST)
	(envelope-from des)
To: "Ilmar S. Habibulin" <ilmar@ints.ru>
Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no>,
	posix1e@cyrus.watson.org, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: secure deletion
References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9905212123450.10543-100000@ws-ilmar.ints.ru>
From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@flood.ping.uio.no>
Date: 21 May 1999 19:52:56 +0200
In-Reply-To: "Ilmar S. Habibulin"'s message of "Fri, 21 May 1999 21:28:34 +0400 (MSD)"
Message-ID: <xzpwvy2pax2.fsf@localhost.ping.uio.no>
Lines: 16
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 19.34
Sender: owner-freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

"Ilmar S. Habibulin" <ilmar@ints.ru> writes:
> On 21 May 1999, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > > My thoughts are about an option in kernel config file (WIPEINFO?)
> > A mount option would be better.
> Why mount option? Secure deletion is a feature of fs and impacts files of
> this on this fs. All of them. So why use mount option?

Because a mount option can be changed at runtime, whereas a kernel
option cannot. A mount option would allow you to enable the security
feature on file systems which need it but not on file systems which do
not need it, whereas a kernel option would enable it unconditionally
on all file systems.

DES
-- 
Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@flood.ping.uio.no


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message