Message-ID: <6b9e9485846c01d57f53adc35ddd0bfe42398eca.camel@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 20 Aug 2021 08:54:55 -0400
From:   Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>
To:     "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
        "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Greg Ungerer <gerg@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@....com>,
        Chinwen Chang <chinwen.chang@...iatek.com>,
        Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
        Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Feng Tang <feng.tang@...el.com>,
        Kevin Brodsky <Kevin.Brodsky@....com>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Shawn Anastasio <shawn@...stas.io>,
        Steven Price <steven.price@....com>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@...labora.com>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
        Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
        Nicolas Viennot <Nicolas.Viennot@...sigma.com>,
        Thomas Cedeno <thomascedeno@...gle.com>,
        Collin Fijalkovich <cfijalkovich@...gle.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        Chengguang Xu <cgxu519@...ernel.net>,
        Christian König 
        <ckoenig.leichtzumerken@...il.com>,
        "linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
        "<linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
        Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/7] Remove in-tree usage of MAP_DENYWRITE

On Thu, 2021-08-19 at 10:33 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 08:56:52AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > bfields@...ldses.org (J. Bruce Fields) writes:
> > 
> > > On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 05:49:19PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > > > I’ll bite.  How about we attack this in the opposite direction: remove
> > > > the deny write mechanism entirely.
> > > 
> > > For what it's worth, Windows has open flags that allow denying read or
> > > write opens.  They also made their way into the NFSv4 protocol, but
> > > knfsd enforces them only against other NFSv4 clients.  Last I checked,
> > > Samba attempted to emulate them using flock (and there's a comment to
> > > that effect on the flock syscall in fs/locks.c).  I don't know what Wine
> > > does.
> > > 
> > > Pavel Shilovsky posted flags adding O_DENY* flags years ago:
> > > 
> > > 	https://lwn.net/Articles/581005/
> > > 
> > > I keep thinking I should look back at those some day but will probably
> > > never get to it.
> > > 
> > > I've no idea how Windows applications use them, though I'm told it's
> > > common.
> > 
> > I don't know in any detail.  I just have this memory of not being able
> > to open or do anything with a file on windows while any application has
> > it open.
> > 
> > We limit mandatory locks to filesystems that have the proper mount flag
> > and files that are sgid but are not executable.  Reusing that limit we
> > could probably allow such a behavior in Linux without causing chaos.
> 
> I'm pretty confused about how we're using the term "mandatory locking".
> 
> The locks you're thinking of are basically ordinary posix byte-range
> locks which we attempt to enforce as mandatory under certain conditions
> (e.g. in fs/read_write.c:rw_verify_area).  That means we have to check
> them on ordinary reads and writes, which is a pain in the butt.  (And we
> don't manage to do it correctly--the code just checks for the existence
> of a conflicting lock before performing IO, ignoring the obvious
> time-of-check/time-of-use race.)
> 

Yeah, the locks we're talking about are the locks described in:

    Documentation/filesystems/mandatory-locking.rst

They've always been racy. You have to mount the fs with '-o mand' and
set a special mode on the file (setgid bit set, with group execute bit
cleared). It's a crazypants interface.

> This has nothing to do with Windows share locks which from what I
> understand are whole-file locks that are only enforced against opens.
> 

Yep. Those are different.

Confusingly, there is also LOCK_MAND|LOCK_READ|LOCK_WRITE for flock(),
which are purported to be for emulating Windows share modes. They aren't
really mandatory though.

> --b.
> 
> > Without being very strict about which files can participate I can just
> > imagine someone hiding their presence by not allowing other applications
> > the ability to write to utmp or a log file.
> > 
> > In the windows world where everything evolved with those kinds of
> > restrictions it is probably fine (although super annoying).
> > 
> > Eric

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists