Messages in this thread | | | From | (Eric W. Biederman) | Date | Fri, 08 Nov 2013 12:51:52 -0800 | Subject | Re: [REVIEW][PATCH 1/4] vfs: Don't allow overwriting mounts in the current mount namespace |
| |
Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 01:16:48PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > >> int vfs_rmdir(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *dentry) >> { >> int error = may_delete(dir, dentry, 1); >> @@ -3622,6 +3636,9 @@ retry: >> error = -ENOENT; >> goto exit3; >> } >> + error = -EBUSY; >> + if (covered(nd.path.mnt, dentry)) >> + goto exit3; > > Ugh... And it's not racy because of...? IOW, what's to keep the return > value of covered() from getting obsolete just as it's being calculated, > let alone returned?
The return value of d_mountpoint can be obsolete as soon as it returns as well, so I don't see this as being significantly different.
I would like to say that any changes introduced here do not matter because all of this is just to keep a semblance of the old semantics. Unfortunately for me part of keeping that semblance is as much as is reasonable preserving the existing race guarantees.
In 3.12 we create a mount with: - The dentry->d_inode mutex held. - The namespace_sem held.
In 3.12 we remove a mount with just the namespace_sem held.
I call covered in: do_rmdir, do_unlinkat, and renameat.
In 3.12 vfs_rmdir checks d_mountpoint with the dentry->d_inode->i_mutex and dentry->d_parent->d_inode->i_mutex held.
In 3.12 vfs_unlink checks d_mountpoint with the dentry->d_inode->i_mutex and dentry->d_parent->d_inode->i_mutex hel.d
In 3.12 vfs_rename_dir and vfs_rename_other checks d_mountpint with the target->i_mutex, new_dir->i_mutex, and old_dir->i_mutex held.
Therefore the guarantees in 3.12 are: - unlink versus mount races are prevented by the dentry->d_inode->i_mutex of the dentry being removed. - unlink versus umount races are uninteresting. - mount versus rename races in testing of d_mountpoint are ignored. - umount versus rename races in testing of d_mountpoint are ignored.
So comparing this to how I have implemented covered the test is at a slightly different location in the call path so there may be a slightly larger race in rename.
For unlink there is a race where the mount could happen after testing covered. Then the unlink happens. Then we remove the mount with detach_mounts.
In the context of the symlink attacks against umounting of fuse I don't see a difference.
In the only case where there is a new race (unlink versus mount) I see a narrow window where new behavior will happen the unlink will win and we unmount the filesystem. So there is a vary narrow window in which we might have a stale entry in /etc/mtab.
So after all of that analysis I don't think we care. If we do care with a little more work we can pass the mountpoint down and test covered with dentry->d_inode->i_mutex held, where we test d_mountpoint in 3.12 today.
Eric
| |