linux-kernel - Re: [patch 5/5] VFS: allow filesystem to override mknod capability checks

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: <20070921145356.GA16379@infradead.org>
Date:	Fri, 21 Sep 2007 15:53:56 +0100
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	hch@...radead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 5/5] VFS: allow filesystem to override mknod capability checks

On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 04:48:58PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> Ah, OK.  Well, that's what fuse would do with the above change.  So
> you are basically saying, the change is OK, but we want proper
> unprivileged mounts first.

Yes, that and that it should be a mount flag, not a file_system_type
flag.

> I'm sure we don't want it by default.
> 
> For example if user bind mounts / onto /home/user/myroot (with 'nodev'
> of couse), we still don't want mknod to work on that mount, for
> obvious reasons.

True, we'll have to deny it if there is any non-privilegued mount of
the backing device possible.   At this point it's getting rather nasty
and I wonder whether it's really worth it..
-
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/