linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] vfs: Tighten up linkat(..., AT_EMPTY

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: <20130825142307.GA27005@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Sun, 25 Aug 2013 15:23:07 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
	"security@...nel.org" <security@...nel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Brad Spengler <spender@...ecurity.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vfs: Tighten up linkat(..., AT_EMPTY_PATH)

On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 12:26:34AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:

> I think this is more screwed up than just flink and open.  For example:
> 
> $ echo 'WTF' >test
> $ truncate -s 1 /proc/self/fd/3 3<test
> $ cat test
> W$
> 
> IMO that should have failed.

Why?  truncate() always follows links, so what's the problem with that
one?  That you get checks of truncate() and not ftruncate()?

> In an ideal world (I think) ffrob(N), frobat(N, "", AT_EMPTY_PATH),
> and frobat(AT_FDCWD, "/proc/self/fd/N) should generally do the same
> thing.

What about the cases where frob() and ffrob() check for different things?
--
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/