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: <20081009121630.GB1623@ucw.cz>
Date:	Thu, 9 Oct 2008 14:16:30 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Hisashi Hifumi <hifumi.hisashi@....ntt.co.jp>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Subject: Re: [RESEND] [PATCH] VFS: make file->f_pos access atomic on 32bit
	arch

On Tue 2008-10-07 20:59:23, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-10-07 at 10:50 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 03:27:44 +1100 Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au> wrote:
> 
> > > So.. is everyone agreed that corrupting f_pos is a bad thing? (serious
> > > question) If so, then we should get something like this merged sooner
> > > rather than later.
> > 
> > - two threads/processes sharing the same fd
> > 
> > - both appending the same fd
> > 
> > - both hit the small race window right around the time when the file
> >   flips over a multiple of 4G.
> > 
> > It's pretty damn improbable, and I think we can afford to spend the
> > time to get this right in 2.6.29.
> 
> The whole point is that such usage is outside the specification and thus
> we don't strictly need to fix this.
> 
> So the question Nick is asking is, do we want to slow down the kernel
> for a few broken user-space applications. Esp. since the race doesn't
> affect anybody else except the broken users of the file descriptor.

Why is it outside spec?

> IMHO not worth fixing..

I believe we even have append-only flag, similar to immutable, which
is used for security...??


-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ