Re: Problem with 2.6.33-rc1 and insecure flag

["J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@citi.umich.edu>]

On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 02:13:07AM -0800, Muntz, Daniel wrote:
> If one were to hit this bug with v4.x, would the error be something like
> this in the RPC layer:
> 
>    Reply State: denied (1)
>    Reject State: AUTH_ERROR (1)
>    Auth State: bad credential (seal broken) (1) 

Since we let the "insecure" flag vary by filesystem, we don't catch this
until we decode filehandles, so return an nfs-level error.

--b.

> 
>   -Dan
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Michael Guntsche [mailto:mike-Z92qn3yYq0hWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org] 
> > Sent: Sunday, December 20, 2009 1:46 AM
> > To: bfields@citi.umich.edu
> > Cc: linux-nfs
> > Subject: Re: Problem with 2.6.33-rc1 and insecure flag
> > 
> > I think I figured out the problem. 
> > 
> > Apparently the code checked if insecure was set, while it 
> > should check if it was NOT set.
> > 
> > Kind regards,
> > Michael
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.c b/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.c
> > index 1c12177..55c8e63 100644
> > --- a/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.c
> > +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfsfh.c
> > @@ -89,7 +89,7 @@ static __be32 
> > nfsd_setuser_and_check_port(struct svc_rqst *rqstp,
> >         int flags = nfsexp_flags(rqstp, exp);
> >  
> >         /* Check if the request originated from a secure port. */
> > -       if (!rqstp->rq_secure && (flags & NFSEXP_INSECURE_PORT)) {
> > +       if (!rqstp->rq_secure && !(flags & NFSEXP_INSECURE_PORT)) {
> >                 RPC_IFDEBUG(char buf[RPC_MAX_ADDRBUFLEN]);
> >                 dprintk(KERN_WARNING
> >                        "nfsd: request from insecure port %s!\n",
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe 
> > linux-nfs" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > 
>