linux-kernel - Re: [patch 00/13] vfs: add helpers to check r/o bind mounts

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: <20080424143537.GG15214@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:35:37 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
	dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, ezk@...sunysb.edu, mhalcrow@...ibm.com,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 00/13] vfs: add helpers to check r/o bind mounts

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 04:16:52PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > And I certainly agree that it ought to be replaced by will/wont pair to
> > close the remount race.  One that had been there all along.  All fh_verify()
> > callers of that kind need it - we want to pull mnt_{will,wont}_write()
> > pair into callers *and* stretch to protect the entire relevant area.
> > 
> > Which contains vfs_...() in case of nfsd_create, etc.  See what I mean?
> > That's exactly the thing I'd been talking about - the area we want to
> > cover is _bigger_ than vfs_...() and contains nfsd-specific logic.  IOW,
> > doesn't get folded into any VFS-provided helper.
> 
> I still don't get it why it needs to cover nfsd-specifi logic.  What
> does nfsd have to do with r/o mounts?

Explain to me again, how fh_verify() manages to contain no nfsd-specific
logics.  Please.  You are right - we do have races there.  Always had.
And nfsd_permission() is the next target for continuation of ro-bind
series.  Assuming that we don't simply make r/w export to hold will_write
all along, in which case all these checks around calls of vfs_...() in
there simply go away - that's also an arguable option.
--
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/