linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Check for immutable flag in fallocate path

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]

Message-ID: <AANLkTinKCUeHLmz3CFh_k3oxEW-p8ta0djGFK3q8vQ+0@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 28 Feb 2011 08:53:31 +0100
From:	Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com>
To:	"Ted Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
	Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	cluster-devel@...hat.com,
	Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org,
	xfs@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Check for immutable flag in fallocate path

2011/2/27 Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 05:50:21PM +0100, Marco Stornelli wrote:
>> 2011/2/21 Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>:
>> > On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 09:26:32AM +0100, Marco Stornelli wrote:
>> >> From: Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com>
>> >>
>> >> All fs must check for the immutable flag in their fallocate callback.
>> >> It's possible to have a race condition in this scenario: an application
>> >> open a file in read/write and it does something, meanwhile root set the
>> >> immutable flag on the file, the application at that point can call
>> >> fallocate with success. Only Ocfs2 check for the immutable flag at the
>> >> moment.
>> >
>> > Please add the check in fs/open.c:do_fallocate() so that it covers all
>> > filesystems.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> The check should be done after the fs got the inode mutex lock.
>
> Why?  None of the other places which check the IMMUTABLE flag do so
> under the inode mutex lock.  Yes, it's true that we're not properly
> doing proper locking when updating i_flags from the ioctl (this is
> true for all file systems), but this has been true for quite some
> time, and using a mutex to protect bit set/clear/test operations would
> be like using a sledgehammer to kill a fly.
>
> A proper fix if we want to be completely correct about updates to
> i_flags would involve using test_bit, set_bit, and clear_bit, which is
> guaranteed to be atomic.  This is how we update the
> ext4_inode_info->i_flags (which is different from inode->i_flags) (see
> the definition and use of EXT4_INODE_BIT_FNS in fs/ext4/ext4.h).
>
> At some point, it would be good to fix how we set/get i_flags values,
> but that's independent of the change that's being discussed here.
>
>                                                  - Ted
>

I was thinking to the possible race with setattr callback.

Marco
--
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/