| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAOQ4uxhnpeyK6xW-c5NOQZ_h1uhAOUn_BbVVVYhUgZ74KSKDKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 18:34:03 +0200
From: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
To: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc: Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
overlayfs <linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org>,
stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][V2] ovl: fix lookup failure on multi lower squashfs
On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 6:02 PM Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 11:50 AM Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> >
> > In the past, overlayfs required that lower fs have non null uuid in
> > order to support nfs export and decode copy up origin file handles.
> >
> > Commit 9df085f3c9a2 ("ovl: relax requirement for non null uuid of
> > lower fs") relaxed this requirement for nfs export support, as long
> > as uuid (even if null) is unique among all lower fs.
> >
> > However, said commit unintentionally also relaxed the non null uuid
> > requirement for decoding copy up origin file handles, regardless of
> > the unique uuid requirement.
> >
> > Amend this mistake by disabling decoding of copy up origin file handle
> > from lower fs with a conflicting uuid.
> >
> > We still encode copy up origin file handles from those fs, because
> > file handles like those already exist in the wild and because they
> > might provide useful information in the future.
> >
> > Reported-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191106234301.283006-1-colin.king@canonical.com/
> > Fixes: 9df085f3c9a2 ("ovl: relax requirement for non null uuid ...")
> > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org # v4.20+
> > Signed-off-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> > ---
> > fs/overlayfs/namei.c | 8 ++++++++
> > fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h | 2 ++
> > fs/overlayfs/super.c | 16 ++++++++++------
> > 3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/namei.c b/fs/overlayfs/namei.c
> > index e9717c2f7d45..f47c591402d7 100644
> > --- a/fs/overlayfs/namei.c
> > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/namei.c
> > @@ -325,6 +325,14 @@ int ovl_check_origin_fh(struct ovl_fs *ofs, struct ovl_fh *fh, bool connected,
> > int i;
> >
> > for (i = 0; i < ofs->numlower; i++) {
> > + /*
> > + * If lower fs uuid is not unique among lower fs we cannot match
> > + * fh->uuid to layer.
> > + */
> > + if (ofs->lower_layers[i].fsid &&
> > + ofs->lower_layers[i].fs->bad_uuid)
> > + continue;
> > +
> > origin = ovl_decode_real_fh(fh, ofs->lower_layers[i].mnt,
> > connected);
> > if (origin)
> > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h b/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h
> > index a8279280e88d..28348c44ea5b 100644
> > --- a/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h
> > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h
> > @@ -22,6 +22,8 @@ struct ovl_config {
> > struct ovl_sb {
> > struct super_block *sb;
> > dev_t pseudo_dev;
> > + /* Unusable (conflicting) uuid */
> > + bool bad_uuid;
> > };
> >
> > struct ovl_layer {
> > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/super.c b/fs/overlayfs/super.c
> > index afbcb116a7f1..5d4faab57ba0 100644
> > --- a/fs/overlayfs/super.c
> > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/super.c
> > @@ -1255,17 +1255,18 @@ static bool ovl_lower_uuid_ok(struct ovl_fs *ofs, const uuid_t *uuid)
> > {
> > unsigned int i;
> >
> > - if (!ofs->config.nfs_export && !(ofs->config.index && ofs->upper_mnt))
> > - return true;
> > -
Colin, I mislead you, this should be (I think):
if (!ofs->config.nfs_export && !ofs->upper_mnt)
return true;
> > for (i = 0; i < ofs->numlowerfs; i++) {
> > /*
> > * We use uuid to associate an overlay lower file handle with a
> > * lower layer, so we can accept lower fs with null uuid as long
> > * as all lower layers with null uuid are on the same fs.
> > + * if we detect multiple lower fs with the same uuid, we
> > + * disable lower file handle decoding on all of them.
> > */
> > - if (uuid_equal(&ofs->lower_fs[i].sb->s_uuid, uuid))
> > + if (uuid_equal(&ofs->lower_fs[i].sb->s_uuid, uuid)) {
> > + ofs->lower_fs[i].bad_uuid = true;
> > return false;
> > + }
> > }
> > return true;
> > }
> > @@ -1277,6 +1278,7 @@ static int ovl_get_fsid(struct ovl_fs *ofs, const struct path *path)
> > unsigned int i;
> > dev_t dev;
> > int err;
> > + bool bad_uuid = false;
> >
> > /* fsid 0 is reserved for upper fs even with non upper overlay */
> > if (ofs->upper_mnt && ofs->upper_mnt->mnt_sb == sb)
> > @@ -1287,10 +1289,11 @@ static int ovl_get_fsid(struct ovl_fs *ofs, const struct path *path)
> > return i + 1;
> > }
> >
> > - if (!ovl_lower_uuid_ok(ofs, &sb->s_uuid)) {
> > + if (ofs->upper_mnt && !ovl_lower_uuid_ok(ofs, &sb->s_uuid)) {
>
> This seems bogus: why only check conflicting lower layers if there's
> an upper layer?
It is bogus - it was my (wrong) suggestion.
The thinking was that we only decode origin fh if we have an upper layer
and index only valid with upper layer.
I forgot the case of nfs_export and lower-only setup.
Suggested fix above.
>
> > + bad_uuid = true;
> > ofs->config.index = false;
> > ofs->config.nfs_export = false;
> > - pr_warn("overlayfs: %s uuid detected in lower fs '%pd2', falling back to index=off,nfs_export=off.\n",
> > + pr_warn("overlayfs: %s uuid detected in lower fs '%pd2', enforcing index=off,nfs_export=off.\n",
>
> And this while this makes sense, it doesn't really fit into this patch
> (no change of behavior regarding how index and nfs_export are
> handled).
>
Again, this was my (not wrong?) suggestion.
What this patch changes is that ovl_lower_uuid_ok() can now return false
and we get to this print although user did not ask for index nor nfs_export.
So the "falling back" language no longer makes sense.
Thanks,
Amir.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists