On Mon, 26 Jul 2010 12:23:36 +0200
Paul de Weerd wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 12:04:04PM +0200, frantisek holop wrote:
> | but regardless of that, i think leaving old garbage
> | after newfs-ing a partition is not a good idea in
> | any case and it's one of those things i wouldn't
> | except
I'm top posting because I think people have read enough.
My sudo policy only allows me to test this;
$ /usr/bin/sudo /sbin/mount_msdos -o
nodev,nosuid,noexec /dev/sd0c /mnt/usb0
and I get
mount_msdos: /dev/sd0c on /mnt/usb0: Inappropriate file type or format
So I see no problem and Being abl
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 12:21:53PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > There is no readlabelfs() for NFS filesystems. You are being too
> > specific in saying how it works.
>
> In the case of an NFS filesystem, mount(8) just checks whether the
> "special" string contains a ":" or "@" character. So
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 12:21:53PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> There is no readlabelfs() for NFS filesystems. You are being too
> specific in saying how it works.
In the case of an NFS filesystem, mount(8) just checks whether the
"special" string contains a ":" or "@" character. So, the diff i
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 10:07:37AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> This diff isn't quite right. There are no disklabels on NFS
> partitions; heck, there's no true disklabel on a MSDOS-only memory
> stick. The language you've written is too specific.
How about the following?
--- sbin/mount/mount.
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 10:07:37AM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > This diff isn't quite right. There are no disklabels on NFS
> > partitions; heck, there's no true disklabel on a MSDOS-only memory
> > stick. The language you've written is too specific.
>
> How about the following?
>
>
> ---
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 09:48:23PM -0400, Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
> > If you wanted to mount according to the partition type number, DON'T
> > USE '-t '. We give you the option to OVERRIDE the partition
> > type number and you made use of that override. You have taken command
>
> I believe t
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 09:48:23PM -0400, Kenneth R Westerback wrote:
> If you wanted to mount according to the partition type number, DON'T
> USE '-t '. We give you the option to OVERRIDE the partition
> type number and you made use of that override. You have taken command
I believe that this thr
From: "STeve Andre'"
> Date: 2010-07-25 23:22:39
>
> I think that is a fundamentally flawed assumption. Root can do
> *ANYTHING*. Anything at all. Sure, preventing crashes is good,
> but you can't get around the fact that root is omniscient.
frantisek holop wrote:
hi there,
i have just managed to "mount" an ffs partition
as msdos. the the system promptly dies.
$ sudo fdisk sd0
Disk: sd0 geometry: 120/255/63 [1935360 Sectors]
Offset: 0 Signature: 0xAA55
Starting Ending LBA Info:
#: id C
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 3:50 AM, frantisek holop wrote:
> so sending half-baked crappy diffs will estabilish one
> as a useful, non-whining member of the community, right?
>
>
Oh...you're on the paid support plan? My bad.
You get OpenBSD for free. That's pretty amazing, isn't it? Why is it ha
frantisek holop wrote:
> my "whining", is a comparison of experiences with others,
> questions if someone can reproduce a particular problem
> i am having, whether it is considered a problem at all,
> and so on. a practice i thought about as the first step
> of bug reporting and as such a perfectl
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010, frantisek holop wrote:
since my first email, i see what i did wrong...
that was the point of writing to the mail list
in the first place, to see if i was doing something
silly. turns out i was. does that warrant abuse?
of course it does, i am not new here.
i also see, th
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 12:04:04PM +0200, frantisek holop wrote:
| but regardless of that, i think leaving old garbage
| after newfs-ing a partition is not a good idea in
| any case and it's one of those things i wouldn't
| except either. my mistake again.
Different filesystems use different part
since my first email, i see what i did wrong...
that was the point of writing to the mail list
in the first place, to see if i was doing something
silly. turns out i was. does that warrant abuse?
of course it does, i am not new here.
i also see, that now this problem became simply
a "should we
On Mon, 26 Jul 2010, frantisek holop wrote:
hmm, on Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 12:12:32AM +0200, David Vasek said that
It is not what happened. The -t msdos was forced by you. But you
ah shit. you are right :]
and it worked because ffs does not overwrite the beginning
of the partition.
i misinte
hmm, on Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 09:41:15PM -0500, J Sisson said that
> On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 8:01 PM, frantisek holop wrote:
>
> > well done misc@, living up to your name.
> > the bootcamp of the internet.
> >
> >
> It's better to create a crappy diff that gets rejected than whine
> incessantly on
bofh wrote:
> Ok, when I first learnt how to use unix nearly 20 years ago, one of
> the things I learnt was that a privileged user can break shit, but
> should not cause kernels to hang or crash. That would be considered a
> bug. Only DOS and windows 3.1 do that :)
Unfortunately it's not that bl
frantisek holop wrote:
> to know the road ahead, ask those coming back.
You mean the ones who like it so much they travel it twice?
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 8:01 PM, frantisek holop wrote:
> well done misc@, living up to your name.
> the bootcamp of the internet.
>
>
It's better to create a crappy diff that gets rejected than whine
incessantly on a mailing
list that by your own admission has a reputation for being like boot ca
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 10:46:50PM +0200, frantisek holop wrote:
> hmm, on Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 02:29:25PM -0600, Theo de Raadt said that
> > > i think it doesnt matter what the user is, this shouldnt
> > > be happening.
> >
> > We make the source code available, and yet noone here has even sat do
> hmm, on Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 08:10:32PM -0400, Tony Abernethy said that
> > Foreign file systems NEVER get prime attention.
>
> that's the kind of thinking that comes from redmond.
You have no right to speak.
> > When you do stupid things the results are rather predictable
> > and you compound
hmm, on Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 08:10:32PM -0400, Tony Abernethy said that
> Foreign file systems NEVER get prime attention.
that's the kind of thinking that comes from redmond.
> When you do stupid things the results are rather predictable
> and you compound your error by trying to blame everybody
STeve Andre' [and...@msu.edu] wrote:
> I think that is a fundamentally flawed assumption. Root can do
> *ANYTHING*. Anything at all. Sure, preventing crashes is good,
> but you can't get around the fact that root is omniscient.
>
Had this 'root' been *omniscient*, the incident wouldn't have
ha
I think that is a fundamentally flawed assumption. Root can do
*ANYTHING*. Anything at all. Sure, preventing crashes is good,
but you can't get around the fact that root is omniscient.
On Sunday 25 July 2010 19:16:05 bofh wrote:
> Ok, when I first learnt how to use unix nearly 20 years ago, one
frantisek holop wrote:
> the borderline between the useful and useless error checking
> is sometimes a bit fuzzy i think.
Not THAT fuzzy.
Foreign file systems NEVER get prime attention.
When you do stupid things the results are rather predictable
and you compound your error by trying to blame eve
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Robert wrote:
> I haven't tried this mount, but IMHO if you mount some garbage as a
> specific file system type, then the OS should give you an error and
> deny the mount. It should not crash.
> Maybe you are mounting through a script, for automated backups, or
>
hmm, on Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 04:33:27PM -0700, Philip Guenther said that
> What does that get us? They can still fuck up ld.so or libc, and
> poof, most the programs on the system will crash when started!
> Overwrite /etc/passwd with /dev/random and rename /bin and your system
> will stop being us
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 4:16 PM, bofh wrote:
> Ok, when I first learnt how to use unix nearly 20 years ago, one of
> the things I learnt was that a privileged user can break shit, but
> should not cause kernels to hang or crash. That would be considered a
> bug. Only DOS and windows 3.1 do that
Ok, when I first learnt how to use unix nearly 20 years ago, one of
the things I learnt was that a privileged user can break shit, but
should not cause kernels to hang or crash. That would be considered a
bug. Only DOS and windows 3.1 do that :)
On 7/25/10, STeve Andre' wrote:
> On Sunday 25 Ju
On Sunday 25 July 2010 18:40:19 frantisek holop wrote:
> hmm, on Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 12:12:32AM +0200, David Vasek said that
>
> > It is not what happened. The -t msdos was forced by you. But you
>
> ah shit. you are right :]
>
> and it worked because ffs does not overwrite the beginning
> of the
hmm, on Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 12:12:32AM +0200, David Vasek said that
> It is not what happened. The -t msdos was forced by you. But you
ah shit. you are right :]
and it worked because ffs does not overwrite the beginning
of the partition.
i misinterpreted what happened,
but this is still a prob
Theo de Raadt wrote:
Thanks for telling me do so some reading, but a google of your name
on these mailing lists will show a 10 year pattern of you not being
able to self-help. Something to do with your parents, probably.
'this hammer *sucks* for putting screws in the wall! what's the deal
On Sun, 25 Jul 2010, frantisek holop wrote:
hmm, on Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 02:29:25PM -0600, Theo de Raadt said that
i think it doesnt matter what the user is, this shouldnt
be happening.
We make the source code available, and yet noone here has even sat down
for 30 seconds and gone and checked
> hmm, on Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 03:17:53PM -0600, Theo de Raadt said that
> > ffs does not use the first 8K of a partition.
> >
> > You used to have MSDOS on there.
>
> yes, that is the correct answer.
>
>
> it's a pitty the kernel is ignoring the partition type id.
>
> it's also a pitty that f
hmm, on Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 03:17:53PM -0600, Theo de Raadt said that
> ffs does not use the first 8K of a partition.
>
> You used to have MSDOS on there.
yes, that is the correct answer.
it's a pitty the kernel is ignoring the partition type id.
it's also a pitty that ffs apparently leaves t
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 4:46 PM, frantisek holop wrote:
> does that almost nothing include the partition type number?
> because i dont see why would the kernel msdos mount code
> even try to start mounting an msdos filesystem with type of A6.
You are more likely to see things if you look for them
>hmm, on Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 02:29:25PM -0600, Theo de Raadt said that
>> > i think it doesnt matter what the user is, this shouldnt
>> > be happening.
>>
>> We make the source code available, and yet noone here has even sat down
>> for 30 seconds and gone and checked the kernel msdos mount code
hmm, on Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 02:29:25PM -0600, Theo de Raadt said that
> > i think it doesnt matter what the user is, this shouldnt
> > be happening.
>
> We make the source code available, and yet noone here has even sat down
> for 30 seconds and gone and checked the kernel msdos mount code and re
> hmm, on Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 01:08:45PM -0600, Theo de Raadt said that
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > That's no excuse. The point here is that any unprivileged user can hang
> > > the system at will.
> >
> > I don't see an unprivleged user.
> >
> > I see root performing the mount, since only roo
hmm, on Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 01:08:45PM -0600, Theo de Raadt said that
> > >
> > >
> >
> > That's no excuse. The point here is that any unprivileged user can hang
> > the system at will.
>
> I don't see an unprivleged user.
>
> I see root performing the mount, since only root can perform mounts
hmm, on Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 12:02:25PM -0500, Chris Bennett said that
> If I plug my 110volt computer into a 220volt socket, it will
> promptly die too!
>
> Why on earth would you even try to do this?
actually, it was a typo... nothing dramatic,
no fuzzy testing of mount, a simple typo.
and i
> >> i have just managed to "mount" an ffs partition
> >> as msdos. the the system promptly dies.
> >>
> >> $ sudo fdisk sd0
> >> Disk: sd0 geometry: 120/255/63 [1935360 Sectors]
> >> Offset: 0 Signature: 0xAA55
> >> Starting Ending LBA Info:
> >> #: id
Chris Bennett escribis:
frantisek holop wrote:
hi there,
i have just managed to "mount" an ffs partition
as msdos. the the system promptly dies.
$ sudo fdisk sd0
Disk: sd0 geometry: 120/255/63 [1935360 Sectors]
Offset: 0 Signature: 0xAA55
Starting Ending
> I haven't tried this mount, but IMHO
I don't see any humility.
On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 12:02:25 -0500
Chris Bennett wrote:
> frantisek holop wrote:
> > i have just managed to "mount" an ffs partition
> > as msdos. the the system promptly dies.
> If I plug my 110volt computer into a 220volt socket, it will promptly
> die too!
Well, hopefully it will only blow
frantisek holop wrote:
hi there,
i have just managed to "mount" an ffs partition
as msdos. the the system promptly dies.
$ sudo fdisk sd0
Disk: sd0 geometry: 120/255/63 [1935360 Sectors]
Offset: 0 Signature: 0xAA55
Starting Ending LBA Info:
#: id C
hi there,
i have just managed to "mount" an ffs partition
as msdos. the the system promptly dies.
$ sudo fdisk sd0
Disk: sd0 geometry: 120/255/63 [1935360 Sectors]
Offset: 0 Signature: 0xAA55
Starting Ending LBA Info:
#: id C H S - C H S
48 matches
Mail list logo
