| 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: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 19:30:55 -0800 From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com> Cc: Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, adobriyan@...il.com, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: revalidate dentry returned by proc_pid_follow_link Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com> writes: >> Hmm. Looking at the code I get the impression that a file bind mount >> will have exactly the same problem. >> >> Can you confirm. >> >> If file bind mounts also have this problem a bugfix to to just >> proc seems questionable. >> > > I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "file bind mount". Is that > something like mounting with "-o loop" ? # cd /tmp # echo foo > foo # echo bar > bar # mount --bind foo bar # cat bar foo # > I'm not at all opposed to fixing this in a more broad fashion, but as > best I can tell, the only place that LAST_BIND is used is in procfs. proc does appear to be the only user of LAST_BIND. With a file bind mount we can get to the same ok: label without a revalidate. The difference is that we came from __follow_mount instead of follow_link. At least that is how I read the code. Eric -- 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