linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 13/17] watch_queue: Implement mount topology and attribute change notifications [ver #5]

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, 5 Aug 2020 09:43:38 +0200
From:   Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To:     Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>
Cc:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
        Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
        Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>, andres@...razel.de,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>, dray@...hat.com,
        Karel Zak <kzak@...hat.com>, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        LSM <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/17] watch_queue: Implement mount topology and attribute
 change notifications [ver #5]

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 3:54 AM Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net> wrote:
>

> > > It's way more useful to have these in the notification than
> > > obtainable
> > > via fsinfo() IMHO.
> >
> > What is it useful for?
>
> Only to verify that you have seen all the notifications.
>
> If you have to grab that info with a separate call then the count
> isn't necessarily consistent because other notifications can occur
> while you grab it.

No, no no.   The watch queue will signal an overflow, without any
additional overhead for the normal case.  If you think of this as a
protocol stack, then the overflow detection happens on the transport
layer, instead of the application layer.  The application layer is
responsible for restoring state in case of a transport layer error,
but detection of that error is not the responsibility of the
application layer.


Thanks,
Miklos