linux-kernel - [PATCH] [241/275] fs: call security_d_instantiate in d_obtain

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: <20110330210807.73A2C3E1A05@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 30 Mar 2011 14:08:07 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	josef@...hat.com, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, ak@...ux.intel.com,
	cebbert@...hat.com, gregkh@...e.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	stable@...nel.org, tim.bird@...sony.com
Subject: [PATCH] [241/275] fs: call security_d_instantiate in d_obtain_alias V2

2.6.35-longterm review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------
From: Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>

commit 24ff6663ccfdaf088dfa7acae489cb11ed4f43c4 upstream.

While trying to track down some NFS problems with BTRFS, I kept noticing I was
getting -EACCESS for no apparent reason.  Eric Paris and printk() helped me
figure out that it was SELinux that was giving me grief, with the following
denial

type=AVC msg=audit(1290013638.413:95): avc:  denied  { 0x800000 } for  pid=1772
comm="nfsd" name="" dev=sda1 ino=256 scontext=system_u:system_r:kernel_t:s0
tcontext=system_u:object_r:unlabeled_t:s0 tclass=file

Turns out this is because in d_obtain_alias if we can't find an alias we create
one and do all the normal instantiation stuff, but we don't do the
security_d_instantiate.

Usually we are protected from getting a hashed dentry that hasn't yet run
security_d_instantiate() by the parent's i_mutex, but obviously this isn't an
option there, so in order to deal with the case that a second thread comes in
and finds our new dentry before we get to run security_d_instantiate(), we go
ahead and call it if we find a dentry already.  Eric assures me that this is ok
as the code checks to see if the dentry has been initialized already so calling
security_d_instantiate() against the same dentry multiple times is ok.  With
this patch I'm no longer getting errant -EACCESS values.

Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <josef@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>

---
 fs/dcache.c |    3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

Index: linux-2.6.35.y/fs/dcache.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6.35.y.orig/fs/dcache.c	2011-03-29 22:50:16.864826890 -0700
+++ linux-2.6.35.y/fs/dcache.c	2011-03-29 23:03:03.231217492 -0700
@@ -1186,9 +1186,12 @@
 	spin_unlock(&tmp->d_lock);

 	spin_unlock(&dcache_lock);
+	security_d_instantiate(tmp, inode);
 	return tmp;

  out_iput:
+	if (res && !IS_ERR(res))
+		security_d_instantiate(res, inode);
 	iput(inode);
 	return res;
 }
--
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/