linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -V18 04/13] vfs: Allow handle based open on symlinks

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 24 Aug 2010 17:21:55 +1000
From:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>
To:	"Aneesh Kumar K. V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>, Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, adilger@....com,
	corbet@....net, hooanon05@...oo.co.jp, bfields@...ldses.org,
	miklos@...redi.hu, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	sfrench@...ibm.com, philippe.deniel@....FR,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -V18 04/13] vfs: Allow handle based open on symlinks

On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 03:12:15PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K. V wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Aug 2010 18:30:24 +1000, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk> wrote:
> > Thanks, I had both of the same concerns as Christoph with API
> > change and exposing symlink fds last time I looked at the patces,
> > actually.
> > 
> > But they can probably be worked around or avoided. I think the more
> > important thing is whether it is worth supporting. This is
> > all restricted to root (or CAP_DAC_READ_SEARCH) only, right, and
> > what exact semantics they want. I would like to see more discussion
> > of what this enables and some results.
> > 
> > For the case of avoiding expensive network revalidations in path name
> > lookup, do we even need to open symlinks? Could the security issues be
> > avoided by always having handle attached to an open fd?
> > 
> 
> For implementing a userspace file server that use handle for
> representing files (like NFS) we would require to have the ability to do
> different file system operations that can operate on symlink to work on
> handle too. 

Right. Is this a really important goal, I'm wondering? Is it realistic
(ie. to be able to remove the nfs server from the kernel)?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/