[lkml]   [2009]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v3] vfs: new O_NODE open flag
    Miklos Szeredi wrote:
    > On Wed, 2 Dec 2009, Alan Cox wrote:
    >>> You're still missing the point. O_NODE is like a hard link, except
    >>> the reference doesn't come from the filesystem but from a file
    >>> descriptor. From udev's perspective there's no difference.
    >> I don't think I am missing the point here. You have a reference to an
    >> object in the fs but you don't have a reference to the driver underneath
    >> s the driver can change on you *while* you have the O_NODE open and fd
    >> live. That cannot happen with a hard link and open.
    >> It isn't the same thing as far as I can see. You don't have the barrier
    >> between the operations that occurs in the real open/close case because
    >> they lock the driver.
    > The file descriptor opened with O_NODE allows exaclactly the same
    > operations that a hard link to the device would, nothing more. It's
    > just a link to the *node*, except it doesn't increment the link count,
    > the driver is irrelevant.

    I don't know what that means. Do you mean that if:

    root creates /dev/foo with 0666 perms
    eviluser opens /dev/foo with O_NODE
    root chmods /dev/foo to 0000
    root unlinks /dev/foo

    then eviluser can't open /proc/self/fd/whatever for O_RDRW

    Because if eviluser could still open /proc/self/fd/whatever for O_RDRW
    (or anything else for that matter if O_NODE isn't set) then you have a
    security problem.


     \ /
      Last update: 2009-12-05 15:53    [W:0.023 / U:31.048 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site