| 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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 19:34:20 +0100 From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> To: Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@...ux.de> Cc: linux kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: VFS + path walktrough On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 08:23:09PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt wrote: > Assuming the server doesn't resolve symlinks itself, Um... What the hell are you talking about? How _can_ server resolve symlinks, when result of symlink resolution depends on where the damn thing is mounted on client and even how deeply the process trying to do lookup happens to be chrooted? It wouldn't work even for relative symlinks - remember that we might bloody well have something bound on the middle of the path in question. Without any knowledge by fs. > Naive question: is it really *necessary* to have all the > intermediate dirs in dcache ? The answer's "yes". -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists