linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 0/1] mount: universally disallow mounting over symlinks

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, 15 Jan 2020 14:48:31 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
        Serge Hallyn <serge@...lyn.com>, dev@...ncontainers.org,
        Linux Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/1] mount: universally disallow mounting over
 symlinks

On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 01:34:59AM +1100, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> On 2020-01-16, Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com> wrote:
> > On 2020-01-15, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 07:01:50AM +1100, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Yes, there were two patches I sent a while ago[1]. I can re-send them if
> > > > you like. The second patch switches open_how->mode to a u64, but I'm
> > > > still on the fence about whether that makes sense to do...
> > > 
> > > IMO plain __u64 is better than games with __aligned_u64 - all sizes are
> > > fixed, so...
> > > 
> > > > [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20191219105533.12508-1-cyphar@cyphar.com/
> > > 
> > > Do you want that series folded into "open: introduce openat2(2) syscall"
> > > and "selftests: add openat2(2) selftests" or would you rather have them
> > > appended at the end of the series.  Personally I'd go for "fold them in"
> > > if it had been about my code, but it's really up to you.
> > 
> > "fold them in" would probably be better to avoid making the mainline
> > history confusing afterwards. Thanks.
> 
> Also (if you prefer) I can send a v3 which uses u64s rather than
> aligned_u64s.

<mode "lazy bastard">
Could you fold and resend the results of folding (i.e. replacements
for two commits in question)?
</mode>

The hard part is, of course, in updating commit messages ;-)