maney at pobox.com
Thu Nov 14 14:09:13 CST 2002
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 01:38:53PM -0600, Kline, Jonathan wrote:
> What about modifying the samba daemon to remove all references of
> unlink? Or just always return -1 and never actually unlink the
It might be that simple, though I wouldn't wager any money on it givent
hat these are Windwos clients we're talking about. But yeah, aside
from the gory details necessary to keep Windows apps from losing their
breakfast, that's what I've been saying all along: put the secure store
on the far side of a filesharing protocol and a lot of the
implementation problems go away because you're no longer dealing with
the on-their-hard-drive filesystem.
AndOfCourse this assumes you secure the server itself from tampering.
Depending on the FDA's specific criteria, you might need to use storage
that's physically write-once in the end anyway.
In terms of utility rather than dollars, I can spend "nothing"
(which to a first approximation is the value of a dollar out of my
weekly budget) to get a non-zero chance of completely changing my
life. Or, in yet other terms, I can just wait for them to send me
the check by mistake, which can't be *that* much less likely than
actually winning [the lottery]. -- David Dyer-Bennet
More information about the luni