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  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:   Sat, 11 Aug 2018 00:11:47 +0900
From:   Tetsuo Handa <>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <>,
        David Howells <>
        John Johansen <>,
        Tejun Heo <>,,
        Paul Moore <>,
        Li Zefan <>,,,
        Casey Schaufler <>,,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
        Eric Biggers <>,,
        Johannes Weiner <>,
        Stephen Smalley <>,,,,,, "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <>,
        Miklos Szeredi <>
Subject: Re: BUG: Mount ignores mount options

On 2018/08/10 23:05, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> There is a serious problem with mount options today that fsopen does not
> address.  The problem is that mount options are ignored for block based
> filesystems, and any other type of filesystem that follows the same
> pattern.
> The script below demonstrates this bug.  Showing this bug can cause the
> ext4 "acl" "quota" and "user_xattr" options to be silently ignored.
> fsopen has my nack until it addresses this issue.
> I don't know if we can fix this in the context of sys_mount.  But we if
> we are redoing the option parsing of how we mount filesystems this needs
> to be fixed before we start worrying about bug compatibility.
> Hopefully this report is simple and clear enough that we can at least
> agree on the problem.
> Eric

This might be related to a problem that syzbot is failing to reproduce a problem.!msg/syzkaller-bugs/R03vI7RCVco/0PijCTrcCgAJ

  syzbot found a reproducer, and the reproducer was working until next-20180803.
  But the reproducer is failing to reproduce this problem in next-20180806 despite
  there is no mm related change between next-20180803 and next-20180806.

  Therefore, I suspect that the reproducer is no longer working as intended. And
  there was parser change (David Howells' patch) between next-20180803 and next-20180806.

I'm waiting for response from David Howells...

Powered by blists - more mailing lists