[techtalk] partitioning security (was lilo)

[coldfire]

> > What prevents the same thing from happening with a soft link?

when a softlink is accessed, the softlink contains in it the name of the
file that it points to.  it isn't recognized as say the file '/tmp/bob'
but rather '/etc/shadow.'  whereas if it's a hardlink, as far as anyone
(even you) is concerned, the file it's accessing _is_ '/tmp/bob.'

> I don't know the terms 'hard link' and 'soft link', but with a 
> symbolic link created with 'ln -s', the permissions of the 
> source of the link wind up being the permissions of the target.
> I don't know if/how partitions affect things.
> 
> However, since it seems hard links can affect security, perhaps
> someone would like to tell me: what are they? How/why do they
> create such holes?

i have to be brief on this .. mail system is going down soon .. but a
softlink is the same as a symbolic link.  and they are fast.  they do not
use any data blocks on the filesystem either.  so it's quick, and saves
space.  however, there exists a maximum size of the target's _name_.  i
can't remember how big, but it exists.

whereas, a hardlink .. an inode contains in it a number associated with
the file that it points at.  creating a new hardlink just creates another
inode that points to the same file and increments the 'links count' in the
inode.




coldie