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]
Date:   Thu, 6 Apr 2017 14:09:29 +0200
From:   Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To:     Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
Cc:     Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>,
        "stable [v4.9]" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ralph Sennhauser <ralph.sennhauser@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ubifs: Fix O_TMPFILE corner case in ubifs_link()

Amir,

Am 06.04.2017 um 14:06 schrieb Amir Goldstein:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at> wrote:
>> Am 30.03.2017 um 13:57 schrieb Adrian Hunter:
>>>> Reading deeper into the proved that I was wrong.
>>>> AFAIKT UBIFS' journal has currently no way to revive a deleted inode.
>>>> So, we have to think about a new solution.
>>>
>>> Deleting the orphan looks right.  Just need to understand whether the
>>> recovery would do the right thing - actually it looks like O_TMPFILE might
>>> be OK and in other case we might be failing to remove nodes with sequence
>>> numbers greater than the deletion inode.
>>
>> Sadly it does not the right thing.
>> I'm currently investigating why and how to deal with it.
>>
>> I also managed to trigger that case. :(
>>
> 
> Richard,
> 
> Were you able to make any progress? still working on this?
> If this is too complicated to get in for this cycle, better send a patch
> to disable O_TMPFILE support for ubifs and fix the problem properly on
> followup merge cycle.
> Because right now ubifs O_TMPFILE support is broken and breaks overlayfs mount.

I have a test and currently testing it. As it looks the situation is less worse
than I thought first. :-)

Thanks,
//richard

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ