lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Aug]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] vfs: Tighten up linkat(..., AT_EMPTY_PATH)
From
On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>
> Does this work for the procfs case? As far as I understand it (which
> isn't saying much), it goes through the symlink-following path.

Right. The /proc case is still separate, and we really should do
something about that too. But again, I don't think I_LINKABLE is the
thing to use there either. We probably should tighten up the magic
/proc follow-link a lot.

> What if we added another field to struct nameidata that's indicates
> what restrictions need to be enforced when following magical symlinks
> and then enforcing them when nd_jump_link gets used. (There are only
> two of these, both in procfs.)

Yes, I think that might be just the kind of thing to do. Except some
tightening could well be quite regardless of any extra flags.

Linus


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-08-22 21:41    [W:0.146 / U:0.228 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site