linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 2/2] fanotify: emit FAN_MODIFY

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170321174504.GB17872@fieldses.org>
Date:   Tue, 21 Mar 2017 13:45:04 -0400
From:   "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
To:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:     Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
        Filip Štědronský <r.lklm@...narg.cz>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Marko Rauhamaa <marko.rauhamaa@...ecure.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] fanotify: emit FAN_MODIFY_DIR on filesystem changes

On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 05:41:22PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> On Tue 21-03-17 11:38:49, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 11:19:43AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > On Tue 14-03-17 13:18:01, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 1:03 AM, Filip Štědronský <r.lklm@...narg.cz> wrote:
> > > > > An alternative might be to create wrapper functions like
> > > > > vfs_path_(rename|unlink|...). They could also take care of calling
> > > > > security_path_(rename|unlink|...), which is currently also up to
> > > > > the indvidual callers (possibly with a flag because it might not
> > > > > be always desired).
> > > > 
> > > > That's an interesting idea. There is some duplicity between security/audit
> > > > hook and fsnotify hooks. It should be interesting to try and deduplicate
> > > > some of this code.
> > > 
> > > Yeah, but ecryptfs or nfsd don't actually call these security hooks AFAICT.
> > 
> > We don't?  E.g. nfsd_unlink calls vfs_unlink which calls
> > security_inode_unlink().
> 
> OK, I have not been specific enough :). ecryptfs or nfsd don't call *path*
> security hooks AFAICT - e.g. security_path_unlink() from nfsd_unlink().

Oh, got it, thanks.

But, no, nfsd is definitely is not meant to be invisible to security
modules, so that's just a bug.

--b.