linux-kernel - Re: file metadata via fs API (was: [GIT PULL] Filesystem Information)

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: <CAHk-=whNwsV6PYrB=MB6y8AJ00GO70CGVUcgKxZHZybhcNp_6w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 11 Aug 2020 09:30:47 -0700
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Karel Zak <kzak@...hat.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>,
        Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
        Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
        Lennart Poettering <lennart@...ttering.net>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ian Kent <raven@...maw.net>,
        LSM <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: file metadata via fs API (was: [GIT PULL] Filesystem Information)

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 9:17 AM Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com> wrote:
>
> This doesn't work so well for setxattr(), which we want to be atomic.

Well, it's not like the old interfaces could go away. But yes, doing

        metadatafd = openat(fd, "metadataname", O_ALT | O_CREAT | O_EXCL)

to create a new xattr (and then write to it) would not act like
setxattr(). Even if you do it as one atomic write, a reader would see
that zero-sized xattr between the O_CREAT and the write.

Of course, we could just hide zero-sized xattrs from the legacy
interfaces and avoid things like that, but another option is to say
that only the legacy interfaces give that particular atomicity
guarantee.

> Since a////////b has known meaning, and lots of applications
> play loose with '/', its really dangerous to treat the string as
> special. We only get away with '.' and '..' because their behavior
> was defined before many of y'all were born.

Yeah, I really don't think it's a good idea to play with "//".

POSIX does allow special semantics for a pathname with "//" at the
*beginning*, but even that has been very questionable (and Linux has
never supported it).

                   Linus