linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 01/12] fs-verity: add a documentation file

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:   Wed, 19 Dec 2018 14:30:05 -0500
From:   "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To:     Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...nel.org>,
        linux-fscrypt@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
        Victor Hsieh <victorhsieh@...gle.com>,
        Chandan Rajendra <chandan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/12] fs-verity: add a documentation file

On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 01:19:53PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> Putting metadata in user files beyond EOF doesn't work with XFS's
> post-EOF speculative allocation algorithms.
> 
> i.e. Filesystem design/algorithms often assume that the region
> beyond EOF in user files is a write-only region.  e.g. We can allow
> extents beyond EOF to be uninitialised because they are in a write
> only region of the file and so there's no possibility of stale data
> exposure. Unfortunately, putting filesystem/security metadata beyond
> EOF breaks these assumptions - it's no longer a write-only region.

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 11:14:20PM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Filesystems already use blocks beyond EOF for preallocation, either
> speculative by the file system itself, or explicitly by the user with
> fallocate.  I bet you will run into bugs with your creative abuse
> sooner or later.  Indepnd of that the interface simply is gross, which
> is enough of a reason not to merge it.

Both of these concerns aren't applicable for fs-verity because the
entire file will be read-only.  So there will be no preallocation or
fallocation going on --- or allowed --- for a file which is protected
by fs-verity.  Since no writes are allowed at all, it won't break any
file systems' assumptions about "write-only regions".

As far as whether it's "gross" --- that's a taste question, and I
happen to think it's more "clever" than "gross".  It allows for a very
simple implementation, *leveraging* the fact that the file will never
change --- and especially, grow in length.  So why not use the space
after EOF?

The alternative requires adding Solaris-style alternate data streams
support.  Whether or not ADS is a good idea or just an invitation to
malware authors[1] is something which can be debated, but my position
is it's unnecessary given the requirements of fs-verity.  And avoiding
such complexity is a *good* thing, not a bad thing.

[1] https://www.deepinstinct.com/2018/06/12/the-abuse-of-alternate-data-stream-hasnt-disappeared/

						- Ted