Going through old emails.
This never went anywhere - Al?
That said, the patch looks dubious. If nothing else, shouldn't it use
the helper function we have, and do something like
if (!error)
inode_has_no_xattr(inode);
instead?
Linus
On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> file_remove_suid() could mistakenly set S_NOSEC inode bit when root was
> modifying the file. As a result following writes to the file by ordinary
> user would avoid clearing suid or sgid bits.
>
> Fix the bug by checking actual mode bits before setting S_NOSEC.
>
> CC: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/inode.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
> index 26753ba7b6d6..f5e01704a5c8 100644
> --- a/fs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/inode.c
> @@ -1631,7 +1631,8 @@ int file_remove_suid(struct file *file)
> error = security_inode_killpriv(dentry);
> if (!error && killsuid)
> error = __remove_suid(dentry, killsuid);
> - if (!error && (inode->i_sb->s_flags & MS_NOSEC))
> + if (!error && (inode->i_sb->s_flags & MS_NOSEC) &&
> + !is_sxid(inode->i_mode))
> inode->i_flags |= S_NOSEC;
>
> return error;
> --
> 1.8.1.4
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html