Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] fuse: define the filesystem as untrusted

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Mimi Zohar <zohar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] fuse: define the filesystem as untrusted
From: Stef Bon <stefbon@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 08:52:01 +0100
Cc: linux-integrity@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-security-module@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx>, Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dongsu Park <dongsu@xxxxxxxxxx>, Alban Crequy <alban@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <1520540650-7451-5-git-send-email-zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

I do not have any comments about the patches but a question.
I completely agree that the files can change without the VFS knowing
about it, but isn't that in general the case with filesystems with a
backend shared with others (network fs's?).

Stef

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] fuse: define the filesystem as untrusted
  - From: Mimi Zohar

References:
- [PATCH v3 0/4] unverifiable file signatures
  - From: Mimi Zohar
- [PATCH v3 4/4] fuse: define the filesystem as untrusted
  - From: Mimi Zohar

Prev by Date: Re: [RFC][PATCH] sched/wait_bit: Introduce wait_var_event()/wake_up_var()
Next by Date: Re: dcache: remove trylock loops (was Re: [BUG] lock_parent() breakage when used from shrink_dentry_list())
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] fuse: define the filesystem as untrusted
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] fuse: define the filesystem as untrusted
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux Ext4 Filesystem] [Union Filesystem] [Filesystem Testing] [Ceph Users] [Ecryptfs] [AutoFS] [Kernel Newbies] [Share Photos] [Security] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux Cachefs] [Reiser Filesystem] [Linux RAID] [Samba] [Device Mapper] [CEPH Development]

Powered by Linux