[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201605310229.u4V2T5K2044187@mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2016 22:29:18 -0400
From: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc: Krisztian Litkey <kli@....fi>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org,
Krisztian Litkey <krisztian.litkey@...el.com>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] ovl: setxattr: don't deadlock when called from
ima_fix_xattr.
On Mon, 2016-05-30 at 16:10 +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 11:53:18PM +0300, Krisztian Litkey wrote:
> > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 8:00 PM, Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > > We deferred __fput() back in 2012 in order for IMA to safely take the
> > > i_mutex and write security.ima. Writing the security.ima xattr now
> > > triggers overlayfs to write the xattr, but overlayfs doesn't
> > > differentiate between callers - as a result of userspace or as described
> > > here in __fput(). All calls to ovl_setxattr() should call vfs_sexattr,
> > > except the one triggered by __fput(). Refer to the original lockdep
> > > report -
> > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.file-systems.union/640
>
> Looks like more fallout from 4bacc9c9234c ("overlayfs: Make f_path always point
> to the overlay and f_inode to the underlay").
>
> Not sure what we want here. Doing everything on the underlying dentry/inode
> would be trivial (see attached patch).
>
> Question is, can we get setxattr() on file opened for O_RDONLY? If so, then
> that could fail on overlayfs (lower layer is read-only).
Normally only after a file has been modified is the xattr written.
However in "fix" mode, the xattr would be written for files opened
read-only (eg. bprm, mmap execute).
Mimi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists