From: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.cz>
To: Damien Le Moal <Damien.LeMoal@wdc.com>
Cc: Niklas Cassel <Niklas.Cassel@wdc.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] blk-zoned: allow BLKREPORTZONE without CAP_SYS_ADMIN
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2021 16:44:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210603144404.GY31483@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DM6PR04MB708127C72BDC03B446997DACE73C9@DM6PR04MB7081.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 11:20:33AM +0000, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> On 2021/06/03 19:07, David Sterba wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 10:00:08AM +0000, Damien Le Moal wrote:
> >> On 2021/06/03 18:54, David Sterba wrote:
> >>> On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 01:54:53PM +0000, Niklas Cassel wrote:
> >>>> From: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@wdc.com>
> >>>>
> >>>> Performing a BLKREPORTZONE operation should be allowed under the same
> >>>> permissions as read(). (read() does not require CAP_SYS_ADMIN).
> >>>>
> >>>> Remove the CAP_SYS_ADMIN requirement, and instead check that the fd was
> >>>> successfully opened with FMODE_READ. This way BLKREPORTZONE will match
> >>>> the access control requirement of read().
> >>>
> >>> Does this mean that a process that does not have read nor write access
> >>> to the device itself (blocks) is capable of reading the zone
> >>> information? Eg. some monitoring tool.
> >>
> >> With this change, to do a report zones, the process will only need to have read
> >> access to the device. And if it has read access, it also means that it can read
> >> the zones content.
> >
> > Ok, so this is a bit restricting. The zone information is like block
> > device metadata, comparing it to a file that has permissionx 0600 I can
> > see the all the stat info (name, tiemstamps) but can't read the data.
> >
> > But as the ioctl work, it needs a file descriptor and there's probably
> > no way to separate the permissions to read blocks and just the metadata.
> > For a monitoring/reporting tool this would be useful. Eg. for btrfs it
> > could be part of filesystem status overview regarding full or near-full
> > zones and emitting an early warning or poking some service to start the
> > reclaim.
>
> You lost me... the change is less restrictive than before because the process
> does not need SYS_CAP_ADMIN anymore. The block device file open is untouched, no
> change. So whatever process could open it before, will still be able to do so as
> is. More processes will be able to do report zones with the change. That is all
> really that changes, so I do not see what potentially breaks, nor how this may
> prevent writing some monitoring tool. Whoever can open the block device file has
> FMODE_READ rights, no ? Am I missing something here ?
I'm not saying the patch is wrong or not doing what it says. What caught
my attention was the fact that the admin capabilities is not that
different from requiring the read permissions. Which for a block device
is not easy to get. Normally block devices have 0660 and group is
'disk', so yeah I can add a monitoring daemon to the group. But that
still would allow it to read all block devices.
So yeah, the patch is making it easier but from my POV it's not that
practical. A more fine grained access control would be needed, or
another way how to read just the zone info. Reading the information from
eg. sysfs has it's own issues.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-03 14:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-31 13:54 [PATCH 0/2] allow blk-zoned ioctls without CAP_SYS_ADMIN Niklas Cassel
2021-05-31 13:54 ` [PATCH 1/2] blk-zoned: allow zone management send operations " Niklas Cassel
2021-05-31 13:54 ` [PATCH 2/2] blk-zoned: allow BLKREPORTZONE " Niklas Cassel
2021-06-03 9:51 ` David Sterba
2021-06-03 10:00 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-06-03 10:04 ` David Sterba
2021-06-03 11:20 ` Damien Le Moal
2021-06-03 11:59 ` Niklas Cassel
2021-06-03 14:44 ` David Sterba [this message]
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=20210603144404.GY31483@suse.cz \
--to=dsterba@suse.cz \
--cc=Damien.LeMoal@wdc.com \
--cc=Niklas.Cassel@wdc.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox