[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.00.1003021845310.1594@tundra.namei.org>
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010 19:01:05 +1100 (EST)
From: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
To: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Joel Becker <joel.becker@...cle.com>,
Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@...e.com>, Alex Elder <aelder@....com>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
a.gruenbacher@...puter.org
Subject: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Correct behavior for listxattr and 'trusted'
xattrs
I noticed that there are differences in the behavior of listxattr(2) for
xattrs in the trusted namespace.
Some filesystems, such as ext[234], require CAP_SYS_ADMIN for this, i.e.
trusted xattr names are hidden from unprivileged users.
I audited the kernel for users of the trusted xattr namespace, and found
the following filesystems not checking for CAP_SYS_ADMIN:
- jffs2
- ocfs2
- btrfs
- xfs
I've created patches for jffs2 (tested) and ocfs2 (not tested) to add the
check -- see following emails. btrfs and xfs have custom listxattr
operations and will need a bit more work to fix.
I'm not sure what the initial intention was for the behavior, although
given that several major filesystems are have been fielded with the
CAP_SYS_ADMIN check, it seems most prudent to make this the standard
behavior for all filesystems, in case any users are depending on it.
Thoughts?
- James
--
James Morris
<jmorris@...ei.org>
--
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