linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Correct behavior for listxattr and 'trusted' xattrs

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]

Date:	Thu, 11 Mar 2010 01:04:52 +1100 (EST)
From:	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
cc:	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, 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: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Correct behavior for listxattr and 'trusted'
 xattrs

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> Now that everyone felt the consensus is that we need the check I look
> into adding it into XFS, but it seems like we already have that check
> in xfs_xattr_put_listent:
> 
> 	/*
>          * Only show root namespace entries if we are actually allowed to
> 	 * see them.
> 	 */
> 	if ((flags & XFS_ATTR_ROOT) && !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> 		return 0;
> 

Looks like I didn't understand what the XFS code was doing.


- 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/