linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/16] vfs: atomic open v4 (part 1)

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: <6422.1337872046@redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 24 May 2012 16:07:26 +0100
From:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
cc:	dhowells@...hat.com, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	hch@...radead.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, mszeredi@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/16] vfs: atomic open v4 (part 1)

I've been looking at your patches when they're all applied, and I suspect
you're missing some security calls.

For instance, in lookup_open(), you call security_path_mknod() prior to
calling vfs_create(), but you don't call it prior to calling atomic_open() or
in, say, nfs_atomic_open().  You do need to, however, though I can see it's
difficult to work out where.  Is it possible to call it if O_CREAT is
specified and d_inode is NULL right before calling atomic_open()?

I'm also wondering if you're missing an audit_inode() call in the if (created)
path after the retry_lookup label.

David
--
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/