linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] vfs: ensure that dentries are revalidated on open (try #2)

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]

Date:	Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:33:56 +0100
From:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
CC:	miklos@...redi.hu, jlayton@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	adobriyan@...il.com, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk, jamie@...reable.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] vfs: ensure that dentries are revalidated on open
 (try #2)

On Wed, 11 Nov 2009, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > Having said that, doing revalidation for proc symlinks and bind mounts
> > (and not just for opens) might make sense.  This is something similar
> > to FS_REVAL_DOT, so perhaps make it conditional on this flag (or a
> > new, appropriately named one).
> 
> Aren't both proc symlinks and bind mounts pretty much guaranteed to
> point to a valid dentry?

It could for example happen that client bind mounts a regular file,
then the file is unlinked on the server.  Then the bind mounted dentry
is no longer valid.

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/