From: Neil Brown <neilb@suse.de>
To: "J.Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] - avoid permission checks on EXCLUSIVE_CREATE replay
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 07:16:31 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100423071631.27ff3a5a@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100422162533.GH5926@fieldses.org>
On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 12:25:33 -0400
"J.Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 10:10:42AM +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
> >
> > With NFSv4, if we create a file then open it we explicit avoid checking the
> > permissions on the file during the open because the fact that we created it
> > ensures we should be allow to open it (the create and the open should appear
> > to be a single operation).
> >
> > However if the reply to an EXCLUSIVE create gets lots and the client resends
> > the create, the current code will perform the permission check - because it
> > doesn't realise that it did the open already..
> >
> > This patch should fix this.
>
> Thanks, but: hm, does this leave a loophole for a clever attacker?
> They'll still have to get past the initial
>
> fh_verify(rqstp, fhp, S_IFDIR, NFSD_MAY_CREATE)
>
> but that just checks the parent directory; if the existing file is
> actually owned by someone else, do we allow an open that we shouldn't?
>
> Maybe when "created" is set we should keep the permission check but add
> NFSD_ALLOW_OWNER_OVERRIDE?
>
I think that is possibly a good idea. However......
commit 81ac95c5569d7a60ab5db6c1ccec56c12b3ebcb5
Author: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@fieldses.org>
Date: Wed Nov 8 17:44:40 2006 -0800
[PATCH] nfsd4: fix open-create permissions
In the case where an open creates the file, we shouldn't be rechecking
permissions to open the file; the open succeeds regardless of what the new
file's mode bits say.
This patch fixes the problem, but only by introducing yet another parameter
to nfsd_create_v3. This is ugly. This will be fixed by later patches.
I wouldn't want to get in the way of these 'later patches' that might be
going to remove the 'created' flag from nfsd_create_v3 :-)
NeilBrown
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-22 21:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20100422101042.226f71d6@notabene.brown>
[not found] ` <20100422101042.226f71d6-wvvUuzkyo1EYVZTmpyfIwg@public.gmane.org>
2010-04-22 16:25 ` [PATCH] - avoid permission checks on EXCLUSIVE_CREATE replay J.Bruce Fields
2010-04-22 21:16 ` Neil Brown [this message]
[not found] ` <20100423071631.27ff3a5a-wvvUuzkyo1EYVZTmpyfIwg@public.gmane.org>
2010-04-22 21:18 ` J.Bruce Fields
2012-12-07 22:50 ` J.Bruce Fields
2012-12-09 23:37 ` NeilBrown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100423071631.27ff3a5a@notabene.brown \
--to=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.