You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It is currently possible for a file to be considered uncovered when the file is never accessed, yet it is possible that a directory listing has been performed on the file's parent directory and the file's basic metadata has been used in that way.
Can anything be done to improve this?
At minimum, it would probably be possible to mark files as either 'not accessed', 'accessed' or 'directory accessed'. The latter case would be an indicator that the file's containing directory has been read and therefore the presence of this file might have influenced some code.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It is currently possible for a file to be considered uncovered when the file is never accessed, yet it is possible that a directory listing has been performed on the file's parent directory and the file's basic metadata has been used in that way.
Can anything be done to improve this?
At minimum, it would probably be possible to mark files as either 'not accessed', 'accessed' or 'directory accessed'. The latter case would be an indicator that the file's containing directory has been read and therefore the presence of this file might have influenced some code.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: