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: <20160226175311.GC17997@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:	Fri, 26 Feb 2016 17:53:11 +0000
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	"Austin S. Hemmelgarn" <ahferroin7@...il.com>
Cc:	Stanislav Brabec <sbrabec@...e.cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
	Btrfs BTRFS <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: loop subsystem corrupted after mounting multiple btrfs
 sub-volumes

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 11:39:11AM -0500, Austin S. Hemmelgarn wrote:

> That's just it though, from what I can tell based on what I've seen
> and what you said above, mount(8) isn't doing things correctly in
> this case.  If we were to do this with something like XFS or ext4,
> the filesystem would probably end up completely messed up just
> because of the log replay code (assuming they actually mount the
> second time, I'm not sure what XFS would do in this case, but I
> believe that ext4 would allow the mount as long as the mmp feature
> is off).  It would make sense that this behavior wouldn't have been
> noticed before (and probably wouldn't have mattered even if it had
> been), because most filesystems don't allow multiple mounts even if
> they're all RO, and most people don't try to mount other filesystems
> multiple times as a result of this.

They most certainly do.  The problem is mount(8) treatment of -o loop -
you can mount e.g. ext4 many times, it'll just get you extra references
to the same struct super_block from those new vfsmounts.  IOW, that'll
behave the same way as if you were doing mount --bind on subsequent ones.

And as far as kernel is concerned, /dev/loop* isn't special in any respects;
if you do explicit losetup and mount the resulting /dev/loop<n> as many
times as you wish, it'll work just fine.  And from the kernel POV it's not
different from what it sees with -o loop; setting the loop device up is
done first by separate syscall, then mount(2) for that device is issued.

It's mount(8) that screws up here.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ