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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 28 Sep 2020 17:02:50 +0300
From:   Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>
To:     linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Mount options may be silently discarded

Hi,

"copy_mount_options" function came to my eyes.
It splits copy into 2 pieces - over page boundaries.
I wonder what is the real reason for doing this?
Original comment was that we need exact bytes and some user memcpy
functions  do not return correct number on page fault.

But how would all other cases work?

https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/fs/namespace.c#L3075

if (size != PAGE_SIZE) {
       if (copy_from_user(copy + size, data + size, PAGE_SIZE - size))
            memset(copy + size, 0, PAGE_SIZE - size);
}

This looks like some options may be just discarded?
What if it is an important security option?

Why it does not return EFAULT, but just memset?

-- 
Thanks,
Dmitry

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ