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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 2022 12:02:22 +0800 From: Michael Wu <michael@...winnertech.com> To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Lukas Czerner <lczerner@...hat.com> Cc: adilger.kernel@...ger.ca, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, allwinner-opensource-support@...winnertech.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix error when itable blocks is greater than s_itb_per_group On 8/4/2022 10:19 AM, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 09:18:59AM +0200, Lukas Czerner wrote: >> >> Hi Michael, >> >> mke2fs is making sure that we completely fill the inote table blocks. >> This is a corrupted image and so AFAICT ext4 is doing the right thing >> here. There does not seem to be a problem to fix, unless you can somehow >> trick mke2fs to make a file system like this. > > Several years ago, android was shipping a bogus/busted > reimeplementation of mke2fs, reportedly because a certain founder of > Android (cough, Andy Rubin, cough) was alergic to the GPL. ("The > problem with GPL in embedded systems [such as smartphones and tablets] > is that it's viral...") This bogus reimplementation would create file > systems where the number of inodes per block group was a multiple of 4 > instead of 8. But, it was under the BSD license, so it was all good! :-/ > > This bogus reimplementation of mkfs would, 50% of the time, create > busted file systems which couldn't be fixed, if they got corrupted, by > e2fsck. This is because e2fsprogs' allocation bitmap code assumes > that you can back the bitarray into a single contiguous memory block > --- and this doesn't work if the number of inodes per block group is > not a multiple of 8. If the file system got corrupted, the only > recourse was to wipe the user partition and the user would lose any > data that wasn't backed up to the cloud. > > This has since been fixed for quite some time, but if there is some > low-end Android manufacturer is using an ancient version of AOSP, this > could be happening even in 2022 --- but that doesn't mean we need to > support such broken file systems. As far as I'm concerned the only > way to make valid Android ext4 system images is the combination of > mke2fs and e2fsdroid, which is what modern versions of AOSP do. > > - Ted Dear Ted & Lukas, Thanks for your clarification. I did several tests, turned outs Ted was right. I'm clear now. -- Regards, Michael Wu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists