linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 31/34] vfs: syscall: Add fspick() to select a superblock for reconfiguration [ver #12]

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: <20181013061141.GR32577@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:   Sat, 13 Oct 2018 07:11:41 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:     Alan Jenkins <alan.christopher.jenkins@...il.com>
Cc:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        mszeredi@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 31/34] vfs: syscall: Add fspick() to select a superblock
 for reconfiguration [ver #12]

On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 03:49:50PM +0100, Alan Jenkins wrote:
> > +SYSCALL_DEFINE3(fspick, int, dfd, const char __user *, path, unsigned int, flags)
> > +{
> > +	struct fs_context *fc;
> > +	struct path target;
> > +	unsigned int lookup_flags;
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	if (!ns_capable(current->nsproxy->mnt_ns->user_ns, CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
> > +		return -EPERM;
> 
> 
> This seems to accept basically any mount.  Specifically: are you sure it's
> OK to return a handle to a SB_NO_USER superblock?

Umm...  As long as we don't try to do pathname resolution from its ->s_root,
shouldn't be a problem and I don't see anything that would do that.  I might've
missed something, but...