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  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:   Thu, 4 Apr 2019 20:46:47 +0800
From:   "zhangyi (F)" <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
To:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
CC:     <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>, <tytso@....edu>,
        <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>, <miaoxie@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: add inode to ordered data list when extending file
 without block allocation

On 2019/4/4 18:18, Jan Kara Wrote:
> On Thu 04-04-19 17:29:52, zhangyi (F) wrote:
>> Currently we capture a NULL data exposure problem after a crash or
>> poweroff when append writing a file in the data=ordered mode. The
>> problem is that we were not add inode to the transaction's order data
>> list when updating i_disksize without new block allocation no matter
>> the delay allocated block feature is enabled or not.
>>
>> write                           jbd2                    writeback
>> append write in allocated block
>> mark buffer dirty
>> update i_disksize
>> mark inode dirty
>>                           commit transaction
>>                           write inode
>>                           (data exposure after a crash)
>>                                                     write dirty buffer
>>
>> It's fine in the case of new block allocation because we do this job in
>> ext4_map_blocks(). To fix this problem, this patch add inode to current
>> transaction's order data list after new data is copied and needing
>> update i_disksize in the case of no block allocation.
>>
>> Fixes: 06bd3c36a733ac ("ext4: fix data exposure after a crash")
>> Fixes: f3b59291a69d0b ("ext4: remove calls to ext4_jbd2_file_inode() from delalloc write path")
>> Signed-off-by: zhangyi (F) <yi.zhang@...wei.com>
> 
> Thanks for the patch. The current behavior is a deliberate decision.
> data=ordered mode does guarantee there is no stale data visible in case of
> crash. However it does not guarantee you cannot see zeros where data was
> written. 
> 

Hi Jan,
Thanks a lot for your explanation. I read the Documentation/admin-guide/ext4.rst,
which said about the ordered mode:

> ... When it's time to write the new metadata out to disk, the associated data
> blocks are written first...

So I reckon that the dirty data block should be written to disk before committing
i_disksize and we cannot see the zero data. Now, I don't find any offical docs to
record the behavior you mentioned, do you have some links talk about this behavior
or am I miss something ?

Thanks,
Yi.

>> ---
>>  fs/ext4/inode.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/ext4/inode.c b/fs/ext4/inode.c
>> index b32a57b..5cfa066 100644
>> --- a/fs/ext4/inode.c
>> +++ b/fs/ext4/inode.c
>> @@ -1419,6 +1419,16 @@ static int ext4_write_end(struct file *file,
>>  	if (i_size_changed || inline_data)
>>  		ext4_mark_inode_dirty(handle, inode);
>>  
>> +	/*
>> +	 * Updating i_disksize when extending file without block
>> +	 * allocation, the newly written data where should be visible
>> +	 * after transaction commit must be on transaction's ordered
>> +	 * data list.
>> +	 */
>> +	if (copied && (i_size_changed & 0x2) &&
>> +	    ext4_should_order_data(inode))
>> +		ext4_jbd2_inode_add_write(handle, inode);
>> +
>>  	if (pos + len > inode->i_size && ext4_can_truncate(inode))
>>  		/* if we have allocated more blocks and copied
>>  		 * less. We will have blocks allocated outside
>> @@ -3185,6 +3195,15 @@ static int ext4_da_write_end(struct file *file,
>>  			 * bu greater than i_disksize.(hint delalloc)
>>  			 */
>>  			ext4_mark_inode_dirty(handle, inode);
>> +
>> +			/*
>> +			 * Updating i_disksize when extending file without
>> +			 * block allocation, the newly written data where
>> +			 * should be visible after transaction commit must
>> +			 * be on transaction's ordered data list.
>> +			 */
>> +			if (ext4_should_order_data(inode))
>> +				ext4_jbd2_inode_add_write(handle, inode);
>>  		}
>>  	}
>>  
>> -- 
>> 2.7.4
>>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists