<p dir="ltr"><br>
On Jan 19, 2013 1:16 AM, "Alasdair G Kergon" <<a href="mailto:agk@redhat.com">agk@redhat.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 11:43:34PM +0200, Kasatkin, Dmitry wrote:<br>
> > This patch I sent out has one missing feature what I have not pushed yet.<br>
> > In the case of non-matching blocks, it just zeros blocks and returns<br>
> > no error (zero-on-mismatch).<br>
> > Writing to the block replaces the hmac.<br>
> > It works quite nicely. mkfs and fsck is able to read and write/fix the<br>
> > filesystem.<br>
> > In normal environment, if fsck crashes, it might corrupt file system<br>
> > in the same way.<br>
> > zero-on-mismatch makes block device still accessible/fixable for fsck.<br>
><br>
> I'm afraid I don't buy that.<br>
><br>
> We can hardly call this "integrity" if it's designed to lose some of<br>
> your data when the machine crashes - and worse - it doesn't tell you<br>
> what you lost, but just gives you blocks of zeroes instead!<br>
><br>
> I think a redesign is needed before this goes upstream.<br>
><br>
> Alasdair<br>
></p>
<p dir="ltr">Do not look to it as integrity from reliability point of view. This might be wrong name for the target.<br>
The purpose is to provide integrity from security point of view. So modified blocks are not available. To prevent attacker to put arbitrary content.<br>
This is not to provide reliability.<br>
Default is to return error. But zero might be desirable. It works as needed for the purpose and data=journal works for this if reliability is required. </p>
<p dir="ltr">- Dmitry<br><br><br><br></p>