linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] fuse: file: limit splice

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, 10 Jan 2024 14:43:04 +0100
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
To: Ahelenia Ziemiańska <nabijaczleweli@...ijaczleweli.xyz>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, 
	Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	virtualization@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] fuse: file: limit splice_read to virtiofs

On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 at 04:09, Ahelenia Ziemiańska
<nabijaczleweli@...ijaczleweli.xyz> wrote:
>
> Potentially-blocking splice_reads are allowed for normal filesystems
> like NFS because they're blessed by root.
>
> FUSE is commonly used suid-root, and allows anyone to trivially create
> a file that, when spliced from, will just sleep forever with the pipe
> lock held.
>
> The only way IPC to the fusing process could be avoided is if
> !(ff->open_flags & FOPEN_DIRECT_IO) and the range was already cached
> and we weren't past the end. Just refuse it.

How is this not going to cause regressions out there?

We need to find an alternative to refusing splice, since this is not
going to fly, IMO.

Thanks,
Miklos