> > I completly agree with you that the suid hardlink issue is not a good
> > point for the above issues. Doing >suid is the right thing to do.
> >
> > But for the quota forbidding the hardlink in such case is a good point
> > IMHO.
>
> Same mechanism. If I see that foo is nearing the quota I can nohup the
> _small_ program that will run through foo's directories every hour and
> open everything new. If I'll be in really nasty mood I'll send it to
> myself through AF_UNIX socketpair and come out clean on fuser (and avoid
> running afoul of descriptor limits). Heavy LART and nearly undetectable
> one - fuser comes empty, process doesn't stand out in top or ps output,
> no extra links, no nothing. And quota running down.
Is not this bug of fuser? I mean, if someone has file opened, should
not it be visible by fuser?
Pavel
-- I'm really pavel@ucw.cz. Look at http://195.113.31.123/~pavel. Pavel Hi! I'm a .signature virus! Copy me into your ~/.signature, please!- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/