[lkml]   [2014]   [Nov]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/3] fs: add O_BENEATH flag to openat(2)
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Andy Lutomirski <> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 7:20 AM, Al Viro <> wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 11:48:23AM +0000, David Drysdale wrote:
>>> Add a new O_BENEATH flag for openat(2) which restricts the
>>> provided path, rejecting (with -EACCES) paths that are not beneath
>>> the provided dfd. In particular, reject:
>>> - paths that contain .. components
>>> - paths that begin with /
>>> - symlinks that have paths as above.
>> Yecch... The degree of usefulness aside (and I'm not convinced that it
>> is non-zero),
> This is extremely useful in conjunction with seccomp.

Yes, that was my understanding of how the Chrome[OS] folk wanted
to use it.

>> WTF pass one bit out of nameidata->flags in a separate argument?

I'll shift to using nd->flags; not sure what I was thinking of there.

(It *might* have made more sense in the full patchset this was extracted
from but it certainly doesn't look sensible in this narrower context.)

>> Through the mutual recursion, no less... And then you are not even attempting
>> to detect symlinks that are not followed by interpretation of _any_ pathname.
> How many symlinks like that are there? Is there anything except
> nd_jump_link users? All of those are in /proc. Arguably O_BENEATH
> should prevent traversal of all of those links.
> --Andy

On a quick search, the 2 users of nd_jump_link (namely proc_pid_follow_link
and proc_ns_follow_link) seem to be the only implementations of
inode_operations->follow_link that don't just call nd_set_link(). So
disallowing that for O_BENEATH might give sensible behaviour.

 \ /
  Last update: 2014-11-03 18:41    [W:0.042 / U:0.628 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site