linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/17] VFS: Filesystem information and notifications [ver #17]

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]

Message-ID: <20200306195823.GZ23230@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date:   Fri, 6 Mar 2020 19:58:23 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:     Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
        Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>,
        Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
        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 Fri, Mar 06, 2020 at 07:43:22PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 06, 2020 at 05:25:49PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 03, 2020 at 08:46:09AM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > 
> > > I'm doing a patch.   Let's see how it fares in the face of all these
> > > preconceptions.
> > 
> > Here's a first cut.  Doesn't yet have superblock info, just mount info.
> > Probably has rough edges, but appears to work.
> 
> For starters, you have just made namespace_sem held over copy_to_user().
> This is not going to fly.

In case if the above is too terse: you grab your mutex while under
namespace_sem (see attach_recursive_mnt()); the same mutex is held
while calling dir_emit().  Which can (and normally does) copy data
to userland-supplied buffer.

NAK for that reason alone, and to be honest I had been too busy
suppressing the gag reflex to read and comment any deeper.

I really hate that approach, in case it's not clear from the above.
To the degree that I don't trust myself to filter out the obscenities
if I try to comment on it right now.

The only blocking thing we can afford under namespace_sem is GFP_KERNEL
allocation.