| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4C117C89.4050600@oracle.com> Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 08:00:09 +0800 From: Tao Ma <tao.ma@...cle.com> To: joel Becker <joel.becker@...cle.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>, mfasheh@...e.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ocfs2: Let ocfs2_setattr use new truncate sequence. Joel Becker wrote: > On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 08:09:36PM +0800, Tao Ma wrote: > >> Joel Becker wrote: >> >>> Is your concern that the u/gid checks may be against stale ids? >>> >> So I think we should have one inode_change_ok before the cluster >> lock and another after the cluster lock. >> The first one will save us a lot of cluster lock effort if the user >> pass us the wrong arguments while the later >> one will test again with the refreshed inode info. >> > > But what if the other node has given us permission, and then we > fail? Say the file was owned by you. On node 2, root sets it to be > owned by me. Then on node 1, I go to change the file permissions. > inode_change_ok() will fail, because the in-memory inode still thinks > you are the owner. > I guess it does need to be under the lock. > OK, so I will revise my patch to move it under cluster lock. Regards, Tao -- 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