linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] autofs4 - fix device ioctl mount lookup

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: <20130904022617.GG13318@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Wed, 4 Sep 2013 03:26:17 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	rui.xiang@...wei.com, autofs mailing list <autofs@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] autofs4 - fix device ioctl mount lookup

On Tue, Sep 03, 2013 at 07:18:42PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 7:00 PM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > That aside, I'm really not happy with this kind of games; this stuff clearly
> > belongs in fs/namei.c where we can simply see the last component.  Doing that
> > on the level of "let's scan the pathname for slashes, etc." is just plain
> > wrong.  Let's step back for a minute here; what are you trying to do?
> > You have a pathname that should resolve to a mountpoint, without triggering
> > automount (or crossing into the mountpoint, for that matter) and you want
> > struct path for the bottom of that mount stack?  Or is it something
> > completely different?
> 
> Can we add a LOOKUP_NOAUTOMNT bit or something (not exposed to user
> space, only used for this particular kern_path() call). Then, if/when
> automount gets called recursively (through autofs4_lookup? Or is it
> just the autofs4_d_automount() interface?) it can just decide to not
> follow that last path.
> 
> Hmm? I don't think we pass in the lookup-flags to d_automount, but
> that could be changed. Yes?

No need, really - what we ought to do, AFAICS, is what umount(2) needs.
I've applied slightly modified variant of Jeff's "vfs: allow umount to handle
mountpoints without revalidating them" (modified by just leaving the
struct path filled with mountpoint and leaving the equivalent of follow_mount()
to caller) to the local queue and I'm pretty sure that it's what we want
here as well.

I'll push for-next tonight and send a pull request your way tomorrow, if you
are OK with that.
--
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/