From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAB307F55 for ; Mon, 4 May 2015 18:13:28 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 472B0AC001 for ; Mon, 4 May 2015 16:13:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net (ipmail07.adl2.internode.on.net [150.101.137.131]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id epTWNCM5BmBp4ZOA for ; Mon, 04 May 2015 16:13:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 09:13:10 +1000 From: Dave Chinner Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5 v2 RESEND] fs: Fixes for removing xid bits and security labels Message-ID: <20150504231310.GF21261@dastard> References: <1425379119-3773-1-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1425379119-3773-1-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Jan Kara Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Al Viro , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 11:38:34AM +0100, Jan Kara wrote: > Hello, > > warning in XFS made me look into detail into how clearing of suid / sgid > bits and security labels is done. And I've spotted a few issues: > 1) MS_NOSEC handling is broken - we set it after each file_remove_suid() call. > However we needn't have removed suid bit simply because we have > CAP_SYS_FSID and further writes to the file from processes without this > capability still need to clear the suid bit. > 2) file_remove_suid() is a misnomer since it also handles removing of > security labels. It is even more confusing because should_remove_suid() > doesn't return whether file_remove_suid() is needed or not. > 3) On truncate we do clear suid bits but not security labels. According to > documentation in include/linux/security.h that's a bug but please correct > me if I'm wrong. > 4) ocfs2 doesn't clear security labels - hard to fix, I left it alone for now. > 5) XFS didn't provide proper exclusion for clearing mode bits. > > This series aims at fixing above issues. > > Since v1 I have removed bogus patch changing inode_set_flags(), I have > updated changelog of patch 4/5 to better explain why ->inode_killpriv should > be called and I have included a fix for MS_NOSEC handling in this series. > Al, can you please merge the patches? Thanks! Hi Al + Jan, What's happening with this patchset? If it's not going to be pulled into the VFS, I'll just pull in a version of the XFS patch that corrects the locking at this point... Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@fromorbit.com _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs