linux-kernel - Re: Regression in 5.3 for some FS_USERNS_MOUNT (aka user-namespace-mountable) filesystems

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20190727022826.GO1131@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:   Sat, 27 Jul 2019 03:28:26 +0100
From:   Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Regression in 5.3 for some FS_USERNS_MOUNT (aka
 user-namespace-mountable) filesystems

On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 07:46:18PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:

> If someone had bothered to actually look at how I was proposing to clean
> things up before the new mount api we would already have that.  Sigh.
> 
> You should be able to get away with something like this which moves the
> checks earlier and makes things clearer.  My old patch against the pre
> new mount api code.

Check your instances of ->permission(); AFAICS in all cases it's (in
current terms)
	return ns_capable(fc->user_ns, CAP_SYS_ADMIN) ? 0 : -EPERM;

In principle I like killing FS_USERNS_MOUNT flag, but when a method
is always either NULL or exact same function...