Duplicate SMB file_ids leading to Windows client cache poisoning

[Ralph Boehme]

Hi Tom!

On 12/8/21 22:18, Tom Talpey wrote:
> I have to say that I'm siding with Steve on not using timestamps,
> even with a monotonicity salt. They're terribly old-school and
> for good reason. If you want reliable results when running on
> everything from embedded ARM systems with FAT (2-second granularity)
> on an MMC card, all the way up to servers with PMEM (<<1us access
> time) and networks with 100+ Gbps pipes, timestamps will be
> whack-a-mole for many years. MHO.

I guess you are referring to filesystem timestamps? I was suggesting 
moving away from that and using system high resolution timer, not 
filesystem timestamp. That's what we're currently using which seems to 
break on certain filesystem with too low resolution. We've been using 
the inode number before which has its own problems due to inode number 
reusage.

-slow

-- 
Ralph Boehme, Samba Team                 https://samba.org/
SerNet Samba Team Lead      https://sernet.de/en/team-samba
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 840 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20211209/60236483/OpenPGP_signature.sig>