All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, vasily.isaenko@oracle.com,
	xfs@oss.sgi.com, hch@infradead.org, sprabhu@redhat.com,
	Stanislav Kholmanskikh <stanislav.kholmanskikh@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfsd: revoking of suid/sgid bits after chown() in a consistent way
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 00:13:59 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131212081359.GB2325@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131212033859.GA5978@fieldses.org>

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:38:59PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> In the v3 case I'd expect the open O_TRUNC to result in a SETATTR rpc,
> in the v4 case an OPEN rpc.  Both result in a call to nfsd_setattr,
> though I only see nfsd_setattr turning off the SUID/SGID bits in the
> chown case.  Are you sure it isn't the subsequent write that clears
> those bits?

We've traditionally cleared the suid bits for O_TRUNC for local
filesystem, although this is more a convention than a real security
need.  It would still be good if NFSv4 would follow the general
semantics.

_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: Stanislav Kholmanskikh <stanislav.kholmanskikh@oracle.com>,
	linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, vasily.isaenko@oracle.com,
	hch@infradead.org, xfs@oss.sgi.com, sprabhu@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfsd: revoking of suid/sgid bits after chown() in a consistent way
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 00:13:59 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131212081359.GB2325@infradead.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131212033859.GA5978@fieldses.org>

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:38:59PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> In the v3 case I'd expect the open O_TRUNC to result in a SETATTR rpc,
> in the v4 case an OPEN rpc.  Both result in a call to nfsd_setattr,
> though I only see nfsd_setattr turning off the SUID/SGID bits in the
> chown case.  Are you sure it isn't the subsequent write that clears
> those bits?

We've traditionally cleared the suid bits for O_TRUNC for local
filesystem, although this is more a convention than a real security
need.  It would still be good if NFSv4 would follow the general
semantics.


  reply	other threads:[~2013-12-12  8:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-11-06 11:56 nfs vs xfstests 193 Christoph Hellwig
2013-11-06 11:56 ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-12-06 13:20 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2013-12-06 13:20   ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2013-12-06 18:08   ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-12-06 18:08     ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-12-06 20:44     ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-12-06 20:44       ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-12-06 20:47       ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-12-06 20:47         ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-12-10 14:43         ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2013-12-10 14:43           ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2013-12-11 10:16         ` [PATCH] nfsd: revoking of suid/sgid bits after chown() in a consistent way Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2013-12-11 10:16           ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2013-12-11 11:00           ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2013-12-11 11:00             ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2013-12-12  3:38             ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-12-12  3:38               ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-12-12  8:13               ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2013-12-12  8:13                 ` Christoph Hellwig
2013-12-12 11:44               ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2013-12-12 11:44                 ` Stanislav Kholmanskikh
2013-12-12 16:01           ` J. Bruce Fields
2013-12-12 16:01             ` J. Bruce Fields

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20131212081359.GB2325@infradead.org \
    --to=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sprabhu@redhat.com \
    --cc=stanislav.kholmanskikh@oracle.com \
    --cc=vasily.isaenko@oracle.com \
    --cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.