linux-kernel - Re: XFS assertion from truncate. (3.10-rc2)

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: <20130521233429.GW29466@dastard>
Date:	Wed, 22 May 2013 09:34:29 +1000
From:	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
To:	Dave Jones <davej@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, xfs@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: XFS assertion from truncate. (3.10-rc2)

On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 06:52:57PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> [  464.210598] XFS: Assertion failed: (mask & (ATTR_MODE|ATTR_UID|ATTR_GID|ATTR_ATIME|ATTR_ATIME_SET| ATTR_MTIME_SET|ATTR_KILL_SUID|ATTR_KILL_SGID| ATTR_KILL_PRIV|ATTR_TIMES_SET)) == 0, file: fs/xfs/xfs_iops.c, line: 719

Never seen that fire before, but this is why we have ASSERT()s like
this - we're being handed something by the VFS we don't expect...

Can you give me some context of the file permissions before the
syscall and what the syscall parameters are? i.e. is this likely to
be trying to strip SUID/SGID during the truncate operation?

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@...morbit.com
--
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/