Every now and then someone proposes a new flink syscall, and this spawns
a long discussion of whether it would be a security problem. I think
that this is missing the point: flink is *already* allowed without
privilege as long as /proc is mounted -- it's called AT_SYMLINK_FOLLOW.
Now that O_TMPFILE is here, the ability to create a file with O_TMPFILE,
write it, and link it in is very convenient. The only problem is that
it requires that /proc be mounted so that you can do:
linkat(AT_FDCWD, "/proc/self/fd/<tmpfd>", dfd, path, AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW)
This sucks -- it's much nicer to do:
linkat(tmpfd, "", dfd, path, AT_EMPTY_PATH)
Let's allow it.
If this turns out to be excessively scary, it we could instead require
that the inode in question be I_LINKABLE, but this seems pointless given
the /proc situation
Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
fs/namei.c | 10 +++-------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/namei.c b/fs/namei.c
index 8b61d10..89a612e 100644
--- a/fs/namei.c
+++ b/fs/namei.c
@@ -3671,15 +3671,11 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE5(linkat, int, olddfd, const char __user *, oldname,
if ((flags & ~(AT_SYMLINK_FOLLOW | AT_EMPTY_PATH)) != 0)
return -EINVAL;
/*
- * To use null names we require CAP_DAC_READ_SEARCH
- * This ensures that not everyone will be able to create
- * handlink using the passed filedescriptor.
+ * Using empty names is equivalent to using AT_SYMLINK_FOLLOW
+ * on /proc/self/fd/<fd>.
*/
- if (flags & AT_EMPTY_PATH) {
- if (!capable(CAP_DAC_READ_SEARCH))
- return -ENOENT;
+ if (flags & AT_EMPTY_PATH)
how = LOOKUP_EMPTY;
- }
if (flags & AT_SYMLINK_FOLLOW)
how |= LOOKUP_FOLLOW;
--
1.8.3.1
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
