linux-kernel - Re: r-o bind in nfsd

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 21 Mar 2008 18:08:53 +0100
From:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:	viro@...IV.linux.org.uk
CC:	haveblue@...ibm.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, neilb@...e.de,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, hch@...radead.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, jmorris@...ei.org
Subject: Re: r-o bind in nfsd

> Nobody wants to send vfsmounts to the filesystem.  But vfs_...() are
> still part of the "upper layer", not the filesystem, so I'm not
> convinced yet.  For example:
> 
> -extern int vfs_mkdir(struct inode *, struct dentry *, int);
> +extern int vfs_mkdir(const struct path *, struct dentry *, int);
> 
> There's one caller of vfs_mkdir that can't do this: cgroup_clone().
> But that can call cgroup_mkdir() instead.
> 
> And having the vfsmount available within vfs_...() functions means,
> that the mnt_want_write() check can be moved inside, which means that
> callers get simpler and less likely to be buggy.  Those are all
> advantages IMO, regardless of any security module issues.

Or we can introduce another set of exported functions (path_mkdir(),
...), and leave vfs_...() alone.  And then the only question is if
LSM's can live with ordering change.

Miklos
--
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/