On Tue 05-05-15 09:13:10, Dave Chinner wrote: > 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... I've sent the patches several times but so far they were ignored. Al? Honza -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
