linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] ovl: validate superblock in OVL

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: <CAOQ4uxgzVVh1F6QiMKcXdBsYaVC7zsF4mCLciYnFU8hBvxzgkA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 12 Aug 2023 19:26:01 +0300
From:   Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
To:     Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        Andrea Righi <andrea.righi@...onical.com>
Cc:     linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] ovl: validate superblock in OVL_FS()

On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 12:14 PM Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 5:43 PM Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 21 May 2023 at 10:28, Andrea Righi <andrea.righi@...onical.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > When CONFIG_OVERLAY_FS_DEBUG is enabled add an explicit check to make
> > > sure that OVL_FS() is always used with a valid overlayfs superblock.
> > > Otherwise trigger a WARN_ON_ONCE().
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <andrea.righi@...onical.com>
> > > ---
> > >  fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h | 12 ++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h b/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h
> > > index b32c38fdf3c7..e156649d9c71 100644
> > > --- a/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h
> > > +++ b/fs/overlayfs/ovl_entry.h
> > > @@ -97,8 +97,20 @@ static inline struct mnt_idmap *ovl_upper_mnt_idmap(struct ovl_fs *ofs)
> > >
> > >  extern struct file_system_type ovl_fs_type;
> > >
> > > +static inline bool is_ovl_fs_sb(struct super_block *sb)
> > > +{
> > > +       return sb->s_type == &ovl_fs_type;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_OVERLAY_FS_DEBUG
> > > +#define OVL_VALIDATE_SB(__sb)  WARN_ON_ONCE(!is_ovl_fs_sb(__sb))
> > > +#else
> > > +#define OVL_VALIDATE_SB(__sb)
> > > +#endif
> > > +
> > >  static inline struct ovl_fs *OVL_FS(struct super_block *sb)
> > >  {
> > > +       OVL_VALIDATE_SB(sb);
> >
> > This could be written simply and naturally:
> >
> >     if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OVERLAY_FS_DEBUG))
> >          WARN_ON_ONCE(sb->s_type != &ovl_fs_type)
> >
>
> Andrea,
>
> There is an inherent challenge with a cleanup series like this one
> that touches many functions to avoid merge conflicts with other
> devel branches. I did not try, but I expect there are conflicts
> with the current overlayfs-next branch.
>
> I also see at least one new direct reference of sb->s_fs_info
> in ovl_maybe_validate_verity().
>
> Please make sure to base your next submission on overlayfs-next
> branch from git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/overlayfs/vfs.git.
>
> Once you do that, we could apply your patches to overlayfs-next
> so they won't get stale again.

Nevermind, I had rebased overlayfs-next, so already applied your
patches with the needed conflict resolutions and addressed Miklos' comment.

Thanks,
Amir.