public inbox for linux-api@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
	linux-api@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
	metze@samba.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
	cyphar@cyphar.com, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Have RESOLVE_* flags superseded AT_* flags for new syscalls?
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2020 13:19:59 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200302121959.it3iophjavbhtoyp@wittgenstein> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8736arnel9.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com>

On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 01:09:06PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> * Christian Brauner:
> 
> >> But that's inconsistent with the rest of the system.  And for example,
> >> if you make /etc/resolv.conf a symbolic link, a program which uses a new
> >> I/O library (with the new interfaces) will not be able to read it.
> >
> > Fair, but I expect that e.g. a C library would simply implement openat()
> > on top of openat2() if the latter is available and thus could simply
> > pass RESOLVE_SYMLINKS so any new I/O library not making use of the
> > syscall directly would simply get the old behavior. For anyone using the
> > syscall directly they need to know about its exact semantics anyway. But
> > again, maybe just having it opt-in is fine.
> 
> I'm more worried about fancy new libraries which go directly to the new
> system calls, but set the wrong defaults for a general-purpose open
> operation.
> 
> Can we pass RESOLVE_SYMLINKS with O_NOFLLOW, so that we can easily
> implement open/openat for architectures that provide only the openat2
> system call?

You can currently do RESOLVE_NO_SYMLINKS | O_NOFOLLOW. So I'd expect
RESOLVE_SYMLINKS | O_NOFOLLOW would work as well. But from what it looks
like having no symlink resolution be opt-in seems more likely.

> 
> >> AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW only applies to the last pathname component anyway,
> >> so it's relatively little protection.
> >
> > So this is partially why I think it's at least worth considerings: the
> > new RESOLVE_NO_SYMLINKS flag does block all symlink resolution, not just
> > for the last component in contrast to AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW. This is
> > 278121417a72d87fb29dd8c48801f80821e8f75a
> 
> RESOLVE_NO_SYMLINKS shouldn't be the default, though (whoever is
> responsible for applying that default).  Otherwise system administrators
> can no longer move around data between different file systems and set
> symbolic links accordingly.

Ok, maybe then we'll just leave RESOLVE_NO_SYMLINKS as opt-in.

  reply	other threads:[~2020-03-02 12:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-02-28 14:53 Have RESOLVE_* flags superseded AT_* flags for new syscalls? David Howells
2020-02-28 15:24 ` Christian Brauner
2020-02-29 15:26   ` Aleksa Sarai
2020-02-29 15:54     ` Aleksa Sarai
2020-03-01 16:46       ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-01 16:38     ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 11:30   ` Florian Weimer
2020-03-02 11:52     ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 12:05       ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 15:10         ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 15:36           ` Aleksa Sarai
2020-03-02 16:31             ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 12:09       ` Florian Weimer
2020-03-02 12:19         ` Christian Brauner [this message]
2020-03-02 12:35           ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 12:42             ` Florian Weimer
2020-03-02 12:55               ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-05 14:33               ` David Howells
2020-03-05 14:38                 ` Florian Weimer
2020-03-05 14:43                   ` David Howells
     [not found]               ` <20200305141154.e246swv62rnctite@yavin>
2020-03-05 15:23                 ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 14:27       ` David Howells
2020-03-02 14:35         ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 14:50           ` David Howells
2020-03-02 15:05             ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-02 15:24               ` Aleksa Sarai
2020-03-02 16:37                 ` David Howells
     [not found]                   ` <20200306140032.tpwfytofaeuazalo@yavin>
2020-03-06 14:48                     ` David Howells
2020-03-02 15:10             ` Aleksa Sarai
2020-03-02 15:23               ` David Howells
2020-03-02 14:30     ` David Howells
2020-03-02 15:04       ` Aleksa Sarai

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=20200302121959.it3iophjavbhtoyp@wittgenstein \
    --to=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
    --cc=cyphar@cyphar.com \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=metze@samba.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox