linux-ext4 - Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4 inode destroy

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]

Message-ID: <5505c121-8038-1b72-423a-42f36257e959@huawei.com>
Date:   Thu, 5 Jan 2017 15:24:14 +0800
From:   "zhangyi (F)" <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
To:     "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu>, <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ext4: increase the protection of drop nlink and ext4
 inode destroy


On 2017/1/5 7:35, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> 
> So how exactly how did we get into this state?  When we read the inode
> into memory, if i_nlink is zero, we declare the file system as
> corrupted immediately.
> 
> So I assume this is happening the on-disk i_links_count (which is read
> into inode->i_nlink) was too low.  So I think the way we should be
> handling this is in unlink and rename, before we let i_nlink drop to
> zero, we need to check to see if there are other dcache entries
> pointing at the inode.  If so, we need to call ext4_error(), and in
> the errors=continue case, return EFSCORRUPTED (aka EUCLEAN).
> 

diff --git a/fs/ext4/namei.c b/fs/ext4/namei.c
--- a/fs/ext4/namei.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/namei.c
@@ -3662,6 +3662,11 @@ static int ext4_rename(struct inode *old_dir, struct dentry *old_dentry,
        }

        if (new.inode) {
+               if (new.inode->i_nlink == 0) {
+                       ext4_warning_inode(new.inode, "Removing file '%.*s' with no links",
+                                      new.dentry->d_name.len, new.dentry->d_name.name);
+                       set_nlink(new.inode, 1);
+               }
                ext4_dec_count(handle, new.inode);
                new.inode->i_ctime = ext4_current_time(new.inode);
        }

Because the filesystem have many errors, and the reason of i_nlink becomes zero is unknown,
the on-disk i_links_count was too low may be one reason.  I think we can add i_nlink check in
ext4_rename just like ext4_unlink did, it can avoid inversion under any case.





--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html