linux-kernel - Re: BUG: Mount ignores mount options

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: <20180810152408.GB6515@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 10 Aug 2018 16:24:08 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, selinux@...ho.nsa.gov,
        Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
        Li Zefan <lizefan@...wei.com>, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        apparmor@...ts.ubuntu.com,
        Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>, fenghua.yu@...el.com,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
        tomoyo-dev-en@...ts.sourceforge.jp, cgroups@...r.kernel.org,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Subject: Re: BUG: Mount ignores mount options

On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 07:36:17AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Aug 10, 2018, at 7:05 AM, Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com> 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.
> > 
> 
> > /dev/loop0 /root/loop0-noacl-noquota-nouser_xattr ext4 rw,relatime,nouser_xattr,noacl 0 0
> > /dev/loop0 /root/loop0-acl-quota-user_xattr ext4 rw,relatime,nouser_xattr,noacl 0 0
> 
> To make sure I understand correctly: the problem is that the second mount ignored the options because the device was already mounted, right?
> 
> For the new API, I think the only remotely sane approach is to refuse to mount or init or whatever you call it an already mounted bdev. If user code genuinely needs to bind-mount an existing mount that is known only by its bdev, we can add a specific API just for that.

First of all, that does NOT belong anywhere other than fs itself.
Example: NFS.  Not every attempt to mount something leads to creation
of new fs instance; moreover, whether it will or not can't be predicted
in general.

PS: for pity sake, fix your MUA; 270-character lines are way over the
top.