linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] vfs: new O

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <E1Mvt87-0005Ne-K0@pomaz-ex.szeredi.hu>
Date:	Thu, 08 Oct 2009 15:34:03 +0200
From:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:	Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>
CC:	miklos@...redi.hu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, dhowells@...hat.com, hch@...radead.org,
	adilger@....com, mtk.manpages@...il.com,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, drepper@...il.com,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vfs: new O_NODE open flag

On Thu, 8 Oct 2009, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> fchmodat(2) says:
> 
>        AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW
>               If pathname is a symbolic link, do not dereference it:
>               instead operate on the link itself.  This flag is not
>               currently implemented.
> 
> If the flag were implemented, it would make sense for fchmod() on a
> symlink to succeed, wouldn't it?

I think allowing permission bits to be changed for symlinks would lead
to a mess.  It doesn't much make any sense anyway.

A logical implementation for fchmodat(..., AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW) would be to
return an error if the target is a symlink (instead of dereferencing
it).

Thanks,
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/