From: "Frank Filz" <ffilzlnx@mindspring.com>
To: "'Chuck Lever'" <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
"'Linux NFS Mailing List'" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: NFSv4 security negotiation issue
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 09:33:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <019501d0efd4$401f4240$c05dc6c0$@mindspring.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7A550B5E-9EAB-4431-BBBA-1C77EE86539F@oracle.com>
> We've found an unexpected behavior with mount security negotiation in the
> current Linux NFS client.
>
> Given two real shares on an NFS server: one is a sys-only share, and the
> other is a krb5-only share. When we try to mount the sys-only share
without
> specifying a sec= option, it fails. Specifying sec=sys is successful.
>
> What is seen on the wire:
>
> 1. The client attempts to access the pseudofs, and negotiates
> krb5
>
> 2. The client walks down the pseudofs namespace to the sys-only share
>
> 3. The client attempts to access the sys-only share with krb5 and gets
> WRONGSEC
>
> 4. The client negotiates sys, and continues setting up the mount
>
> 5. nfs_fs_mount_common() invokes nfs_get_root(), but it uses the
> pseudofs superblock, so it does a GETATTR on the share's root directory
with
> krb5, and that fails
>
> At this point the client gives up, and the mount attempt fails.
>
> We could alter the server to allow a GETATTR with the same flavor as the
> underlying directory. But seems like the problem is on the client: it
should
> use the negotiated flavor that is appropriate to the share, not the flavor
> appropriate for the pseudofs.
>
> Any thoughts?
Hmm, I thought maybe this was a scenario I had not tested, but I think I'm
misunderstanding the sequence. Could you summarize the ops and response for
each COMPOUND request?
I don't think the server should have to do anything special here.
Frank
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-15 16:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-15 15:52 NFSv4 security negotiation issue Chuck Lever
2015-09-15 16:33 ` Frank Filz [this message]
2015-09-15 17:15 ` Chuck Lever
2015-09-15 17:41 ` Frank Filz
2015-09-15 18:17 ` Chuck Lever
2015-09-15 18:45 ` Frank Filz
2015-09-15 19:11 ` Chuck Lever
2015-09-15 20:28 ` Frank Filz
2015-09-15 20:36 ` Chuck Lever
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='019501d0efd4$401f4240$c05dc6c0$@mindspring.com' \
--to=ffilzlnx@mindspring.com \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox