[PC-BSD Testing] Automounting of USB drives - Why is it a problem?

Arthur a-koziol at neiu.edu
Wed Apr 15 16:08:33 PDT 2009

>Rod Clark wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Apr 2009, Kris Moore wrote:
> >
> >> Right now on my system, If I plugin a USB memory stick, the KDE device
> >> notifier pops up, and lets me know, and gives me the option to mount, or
> >> run other actions on the device. That seems like a pretty reasonable
> >> thing to do to me. I only have to click once, and my media is mounted
> >> and ready to go.
> >>
> >
> > Kris,
> >
> > Yes, the notification box is OK for prompting what to at
> > insertion. But it does nothing to prevent crashing on removal,
> > which is the more pressing problem. You must be luckier than
> > some other people in your choice of USB devices.
> >
> > Two of my USB drives work well with FreeBSD, including an 8MB
> > Sandisk Cruzer Contour. But other USB devices always crash the
> > system upon removal, even after properly unmounting. And
> > sometimes they crash it merely upon insertion. I'm now buying a
> > third SD card reader in hopes that it will let me read the card
> > from my Canon camera, after my Sandisk reader caused
> > insertion/removal crashes. I'm going to try a Kingston FCR-HS
> > 219/1 next.
> >
> > It would be wonderful if there were a way to scan the device
> > first and determine whether it's going to be compatible, and if
> > not then politely refuse to recognize it.
> >
> > -rsc
> > _______________________________________________
> > Testing mailing list
> > Testing at lists.pcbsd.org
> > http://lists.pcbsd.org/mailman/listinfo/testing
> >
> >
>The reason why FreeBSD doesn't automount with the *default*
>configuration is for security purposes and that actually is the reason.
>Giving user space access to devices connected to a server (in this
>scenario) without any special configuration by root/admins poses a
>security risk that the devs don't like, I suppose - and I agree.
>Crashing upon removal...filesystem/kernel ???
>OSX has NetBSD under the hood, mostly kernel differences (though they
>use MACH kernel anyway) from FreeBSD. But that's like explaining why
>Linux is different than FreeBSD to people that use Windows.

Yeah, saying Mac OS X has BSD under the hood is like saying a Cooper Mini
is really a BMW because it has some BMW technology in the engine. Darwin/
Mach has a *portion* of BSD code but not to the extent that Odhiambo thinks.
How the Mac programers make Mac OS operate is mutually exclusive to the
model that FreeBSD uses. Even I was aware that not auto-mounting USB devices
was due to the security model of FreeBSD.


More information about the Testing mailing list