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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 12:33:48 +0100 From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> To: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com> Cc: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>, Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>, Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>, viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>, Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>, linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/17] VFS: Filesystem information and notifications [ver #17] On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 11:25 AM Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 03, 2020 at 11:13:50AM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2020 at 11:00 AM Christian Brauner > > <christian.brauner@...ntu.com> wrote: > > > More magic links to beam you around sounds like a bad idea. We had a > > > bunch of CVEs around them in containers and they were one of the major > > > reasons behind us pushing for openat2(). That's why it has a > > > RESOLVE_NO_MAGICLINKS flag. > > > > No, that link wouldn't beam you around at all, it would end up in an > > internally mounted instance of a mountfs, a safe place where no > > Even if it is a magic link to a safe place it's a magic link. They > aren't a great solution to this problem. fsinfo() is cleaner and > simpler as it creates a context for a supervised mount which gives the a > managing application fine-grained control and makes it easily > extendable. Yeah, it's a nice and clean interface in the ioctl(2) sense. Sure, fsinfo() is way better than ioctl(), but it at the core it's still the same syscall multiplexer, do everything hack. > Also, we're apparently at the point where it seems were suggesting > another (pseudo)filesystem to get information about filesystems. Implementation detail. Why would you care? Thanks, Miklos
Powered by blists - more mailing lists