linux-kernel - RE: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/3] f2fs crypto: check context consistent for rename2

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 29 May 2015 10:54:14 +0800
From:	Chao Yu <chao2.yu@...sung.com>
To:	'Jaegeuk Kim' <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: RE: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/3] f2fs crypto: check context consistent for
 rename2

Hi Jaegeuk,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jaegeuk Kim [mailto:jaegeuk@...nel.org]
> Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 10:29 AM
> To: Chao Yu
> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH 1/3] f2fs crypto: check context consistent for rename2
> 
> On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 10:07:26AM -0700, Jaegeuk Kim wrote:
> > Hi Chao,
> >
> > On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 06:07:02PM +0800, Chao Yu wrote:
> > > For exchange rename, we should check context consistent of encryption
> > > between new_dir and old_inode or old_dir and new_inode. Otherwise
> > > inheritance of parent's encryption context will be broken.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Chao Yu <chao2.yu@...sung.com>
> > > ---
> > >  fs/f2fs/namei.c | 9 +++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/namei.c b/fs/f2fs/namei.c
> > > index daed09c..3188464 100644
> > > --- a/fs/f2fs/namei.c
> > > +++ b/fs/f2fs/namei.c
> > > @@ -754,6 +754,15 @@ static int f2fs_cross_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry
> *old_dentry,
> > >  	int old_nlink = 0, new_nlink = 0;
> > >  	int err = -ENOENT;
> > >
> > > +	if ((old_dir != new_dir) &&
> > > +		(!f2fs_is_child_context_consistent_with_parent(new_dir,
> > > +							old_inode) ||
> > > +		!f2fs_is_child_context_consistent_with_parent(old_dir,
> > > +							new_inode))) {
> > > +		err = -EPERM;
> > > +		goto out;
> > > +	}
> > > +
> >
> > Seems like we need this?
> >
> > ---
> >  fs/f2fs/namei.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/f2fs/namei.c b/fs/f2fs/namei.c
> > index 55d0d27..4772c14 100644
> > --- a/fs/f2fs/namei.c
> > +++ b/fs/f2fs/namei.c
> > @@ -756,6 +756,21 @@ static int f2fs_cross_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry
> *old_dentry,
> >  	int old_nlink = 0, new_nlink = 0;
> >  	int err = -ENOENT;
> >
> > +	if (old_dir != new_dir) {
> > +		if (f2fs_encrypted_inode(new_dir) &&
> > +			!f2fs_is_child_context_consistent_with_parent(new_dir,
> > +							old_inode)) {
> > +			err = -EPERM;
> > +			goto out;
> > +		}
> > +		if (f2fs_encrypted_inode(old_dir) &&
> > +			!f2fs_is_child_context_consistent_with_parent(old_dir,
> > +							new_inode)) {
> > +			err = -EPERM;
> > +			goto out;
> > +		}
> > +	}
> 
> It needs to sync with ext4 patch published by Ted.

No objection, please go ahead.

Previously, I remove f2fs_encrypted_inode(parent_inode) condition because in
f2fs_is_child_context_consistent_with_parent we have the same verification.

	/* no restrictions if the parent directory is not encrypted */
	if (!f2fs_encrypted_inode(parent))
		return 1;

Thanks,

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> > +
> >  	f2fs_balance_fs(sbi);
> >
> >  	old_entry = f2fs_find_entry(old_dir, &old_dentry->d_name, &old_page);
> > --
> > 2.1.1
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > _______________________________________________
> > Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list
> > Linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel

--
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/