From: Eric Lammerts <eric@lammerts.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Marc Ballarin <Ballarin.Marc@gmx.de>, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
albert@users.sourceforge.net,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: dynamic /dev security hole?
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 12:47:15 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0408091238080.8693@vivaldi.madbase.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1092065586.14144.31.camel@localhost.localdomain>
I guess I'm missing something here...
On Mon, 9 Aug 2004, Alan Cox wrote:
> User closes device
> I have linked copy (not open)
> Device unloaded
At this point, udev (with the chown/chmod patch) would chown your
linked copy (before unlinking the original device node), right?
> I open the linked copy
So this wouldn't work.
> This makes new device load for me.
>
>
> I'm just trying to point out that the order of operations matters here
> because the old nodes must all be dead before the new device. Its even
> worse for less dynamic numbering.
The only problem I can think of is a race when a new device appears
with the same major/minor before udev gets a chance to do its stuff,
eg.
1) User closes device
2) I have linked copy (not open)
3) Device unloaded
4) New device appears
5) I open the linked copy
6) Udev chowns/chmods old device node (triggered by 3)) --> too late
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-09 16:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-08 12:47 dynamic /dev security hole? Albert Cahalan
2004-08-08 15:58 ` Marc Ballarin
2004-08-08 15:04 ` Albert Cahalan
2004-08-08 20:42 ` Greg KH
2004-08-08 16:21 ` Greg KH
2004-08-08 21:43 ` Marc Ballarin
2004-08-08 22:07 ` Marc Ballarin
2004-08-09 4:40 ` Eric Lammerts
2004-08-09 13:30 ` Michael Buesch
2004-08-09 13:19 ` Albert Cahalan
2004-08-09 16:54 ` Michael Buesch
2004-08-09 17:04 ` Eric Lammerts
2004-08-09 17:14 ` Michael Buesch
2004-08-10 0:21 ` Greg KH
2004-08-11 17:12 ` [RFC, PATCH] sys_revoke(), just a try. (was: Re: dynamic /dev security hole?) Michael Buesch
2004-08-12 16:49 ` Michael Buesch
2004-08-12 19:51 ` Alan Cox
2004-08-12 19:39 ` Albert Cahalan
2004-08-13 12:39 ` Michael Buesch
2004-08-09 14:49 ` dynamic /dev security hole? Alan Cox
2004-08-09 16:17 ` Eric Lammerts
2004-08-09 15:33 ` Alan Cox
2004-08-09 16:47 ` Eric Lammerts [this message]
2004-08-09 17:54 ` Alan Cox
2004-08-10 0:21 ` Greg KH
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=Pine.LNX.4.58.0408091238080.8693@vivaldi.madbase.net \
--to=eric@lammerts.org \
--cc=Ballarin.Marc@gmx.de \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=albert@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@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.