[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56A0133B.9090501@codeaurora.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 15:07:39 -0800
From: Nikhilesh Reddy <reddyn@...eaurora.org>
To: Jann Horn <jannhorn@...glemail.com>
CC: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
fuse-devel <fuse-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>,
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, jack@...e.cz,
Antonio SJ Musumeci <trapexit@...wn.link>, sven.utcke@....de,
Nikolaus Rath <nikolaus@...h.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fuse: Add support for fuse stacked I/O
On 01/18/2016 07:07 PM, Jann Horn wrote:
> 2016-01-14 0:53 GMT+01:00 Nikhilesh Reddy <reddyn@...eaurora.org>:
>> Add support for filesystem stacked read/write of files
>> when enabled through a userspace init option of FUSE_STACKED_IO.
>>
>> When FUSE_STACKED_IO is enabled all the reads and writes
>> to the fuse mount point go directly to the native filesystem
>> rather than through the fuse daemon. All requests that aren't
>> read/write still go thought the userspace code.
>
> Maybe I missed it, but how does this guard against kernel stack
> overflow and how does it interact with the "sb->s_stack_depth >
> FILESYSTEM_MAX_STACK_DEPTH" stacking limit that overlayfs and ecryptfs
> use?
>
> As far as I can tell from a quick glance, someone could just stack
> lots of FUSE files on top of each other and cause kernel stack
> overflow that way, and that's nasty.
>
Hi
Thanks so much for your comment and for catching this.
I have fixed the code to prevent further stacking and will send it out
in the updated version of the patch ( now called fuse passthrough ).
--
Thanks
Nikhilesh Reddy
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists