jradd

magic numbers are vital for filesystem reference in kernel code to distinguish load order of partitions in a disk, and probably used for memory allocation, and permissions. The reason why the magic code exists among code itself seems a little redundant with type checking and garbage collection or proper inheritance.

no, the fsync call remains the same as it does in ext3 and most filesystems.

However in ext4 there is no need to call sync unless you disable batch processing of synchronous writes.

manpage suggests the article is not mistaken. `max_batch_time=0` disables batch processing synchronous write operations. the default is 15ms.

It seems like a good idea for client filesystem to mount synchronously for data integrity. I'm not aware of i/o being a factor here.

Of course this doesn't prevent applications mishandling of file objects.

chrome potato here. seems approx. 6 seconds for collapsing any that i've clicked.

is this why big–pharma harvest blue bloods? i'm not sure i believe this hoopla about the tree of life.

but i'm interested in the biomedical applications from obscure species that feature bioluminescence, magic pheromones and how to test the quality of Eel I just put on back order.

i loved your italicized block. don't down vote this one.

i just wanted to save this here. good point.

I love how elephant means 'resemble' uses symbol for 'family' （家） upper radical 'knife' (刀)

Elephant in the (里的大象)

亻人 (r)en

氵水 shui

手扌 shou (of hands)

忄心 xin

犭犬 quan 豬 zhu

刀刂 dao

       到 until
       象 elephant 

不客气 bu ke qi [you are] welcome。

xdr was developed by sun, i don't think that is the issue here. I think it is the service that rpc doesn't recognize. i'm assuming in this case it is rails under ruby or something using ssh or ssl that require secure and non-blocking calls to low order operations.

The issue is in the handling of the connection. This is the issue i'm having right now with [the] wrapping [of] secure binary streams of [un]trusted data with authentic transport control.

eg tls 1_2 over ssl

good point. i think 'getting env vars' is the bigger issue here.

It seems like most people here don't see what the root cause here is. System and user level processes with high order 'actions' for idempotent handling of secure channel operations (session negotiation, out-of-band data) are vulnerable to xss, side-channel attack for 'actions' that use stdout on/at execution of low order operations handling packed binary data that upon execution may contain shell code or encoded instructions.

they will patch a PoC, but how will we know the root cause is patched? the service parameters can be fuzzed by someone to check for injection (if they can).

tldr; I don't know what the root cause is.

What is a great question. A good one gets a scoff and raises your chin.

You can try setting up a vpn and no tcp/udp is necessary. Pinhole could be accessed over local network.