| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20150619082928.GJ17109@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 09:29:28 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, sds@...ho.nsa.gov,
Linux-Fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Security: Provide unioned file support
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 10:11:28AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/llite/file.c | 12 ++++++------
> fs/9p/vfs_file.c | 6 +++---
> fs/btrfs/file.c | 2 +-
> fs/btrfs/ioctl.c | 13 +++++++------
> fs/ceph/dir.c | 6 +++---
> fs/ceph/file.c | 2 +-
> fs/cifs/file.c | 4 ++--
> fs/cifs/readdir.c | 4 ++--
> fs/configfs/dir.c | 8 ++++----
> fs/configfs/file.c | 15 +++++++++------
> fs/fat/file.c | 7 ++++---
> fs/fuse/dir.c | 2 +-
> fs/hfsplus/ioctl.c | 2 +-
> fs/hostfs/hostfs_kern.c | 4 ++--
> fs/hppfs/hppfs.c | 4 ++--
> fs/kernfs/dir.c | 2 +-
> fs/kernfs/file.c | 6 +++---
> fs/libfs.c | 6 +++---
> fs/ncpfs/dir.c | 4 ++--
> fs/nfs/dir.c | 6 +++---
> fs/nfs/inode.c | 2 +-
> fs/nfs/nfs4file.c | 4 ++--
> fs/overlayfs/readdir.c | 10 +++++-----
> fs/proc/base.c | 6 +++---
> fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c | 2 +-
> include/linux/fs.h | 5 +++++
> 26 files changed, 77 insertions(+), 67 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/fs/9p/vfs_file.c
> +++ b/fs/9p/vfs_file.c
> @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ int v9fs_file_open(struct inode *inode,
> v9fs_proto_dotu(v9ses));
> fid = file->private_data;
> if (!fid) {
> - fid = v9fs_fid_clone(file->f_path.dentry);
> + fid = v9fs_fid_clone(file_dentry(file));
> if (IS_ERR(fid))
> return PTR_ERR(fid);
>
> @@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ int v9fs_file_open(struct inode *inode,
> * because we want write after unlink usecase
> * to work.
> */
> - fid = v9fs_writeback_fid(file->f_path.dentry);
> + fid = v9fs_writeback_fid(file_dentry(file));
> if (IS_ERR(fid)) {
> err = PTR_ERR(fid);
> mutex_unlock(&v9inode->v_mutex);
> @@ -515,7 +515,7 @@ v9fs_mmap_file_mmap(struct file *filp, s
> * because we want write after unlink usecase
> * to work.
> */
> - fid = v9fs_writeback_fid(filp->f_path.dentry);
> + fid = v9fs_writeback_fid(file_dentry(filp));
> if (IS_ERR(fid)) {
> retval = PTR_ERR(fid);
> mutex_unlock(&v9inode->v_mutex);
> --- a/fs/btrfs/file.c
> +++ b/fs/btrfs/file.c
> @@ -1861,7 +1861,7 @@ static int start_ordered_ops(struct inod
> */
> int btrfs_sync_file(struct file *file, loff_t start, loff_t end, int datasync)
> {
> - struct dentry *dentry = file->f_path.dentry;
> + struct dentry *dentry = file_dentry(file);
> struct inode *inode = d_inode(dentry);
file_inode(file), please. And looking at the only other use
of dentry in there... I don't see anything that would guarantee that
dentry will remain the child of its parent, which btrfs_log_dentry_safe()
seems to assume.
> +static noinline int btrfs_mksubvol(struct file *file,
> char *name, int namelen,
> struct btrfs_root *snap_src,
> u64 *async_transid, bool readonly,
> struct btrfs_qgroup_inherit *inherit)
> {
> - struct inode *dir = d_inode(parent->dentry);
> + struct dentry *parent = file_dentry(file);
> + struct inode *dir = d_inode(parent);
Directory, probably?
> - dentry = lookup_one_len(name, parent->dentry, namelen);
> + dentry = lookup_one_len(name, parent, namelen);
... it would better be one.
> @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ static int __dcache_readdir(struct file
> u32 shared_gen)
> {
> struct ceph_file_info *fi = file->private_data;
> - struct dentry *parent = file->f_path.dentry;
> + struct dentry *parent = file_dentry(file);
Directory. And I would be very surprised if ceph + overlayfs wouldn't
step into some rather nasty things...
> static int configfs_dir_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> {
> - struct dentry * dentry = file->f_path.dentry;
> + struct dentry *dentry = file_dentry(file);
Directory, and combination of configfs with overlayfs is *definitely*
a bad idea.
> --- a/fs/fat/file.c
> +++ b/fs/fat/file.c
Unusable with overlayfs due to ->d_hash() issues.
> --- a/fs/fuse/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/fuse/dir.c
> @@ -1165,7 +1165,7 @@ static int fuse_direntplus_link(struct f
> int err;
> struct fuse_entry_out *o = &direntplus->entry_out;
> struct fuse_dirent *dirent = &direntplus->dirent;
> - struct dentry *parent = file->f_path.dentry;
> + struct dentry *parent = file_dentry(file);
Directory.
> --- a/fs/hfsplus/ioctl.c
> +++ b/fs/hfsplus/ioctl.c
->d_hash()
> --- a/fs/hostfs/hostfs_kern.c
> +++ b/fs/hostfs/hostfs_kern.c
> @@ -284,7 +284,7 @@ static int hostfs_readdir(struct file *f
> int error, len;
> unsigned int type;
>
> - name = dentry_name(file->f_path.dentry);
> + name = dentry_name(file_dentry(file));
Directory
> --- a/fs/hppfs/hppfs.c
> +++ b/fs/hppfs/hppfs.c
git rm fodder.
> --- a/fs/kernfs/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/kernfs/dir.c
Are you seriously going to allow that as overlayfs layer?
> --- a/fs/ncpfs/dir.c
> +++ b/fs/ncpfs/dir.c
> @@ -417,7 +417,7 @@ ncp_invalidate_dircache_entries(struct d
>
> static int ncp_readdir(struct file *file, struct dir_context *ctx)
> {
Directory (and case sensitivity issues on top of that).
> --- a/fs/libfs.c
> +++ b/fs/libfs.c
> @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ int dcache_dir_open(struct inode *inode,
> {
> static struct qstr cursor_name = QSTR_INIT(".", 1);
>
> - file->private_data = d_alloc(file->f_path.dentry, &cursor_name);
> + file->private_data = d_alloc(file_dentry(file), &cursor_name);
Directory.
... and so on
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists