On 07/11/2017 11:45 PM, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > Quoting Stefan Berger (Stefan Bergerstefanb@linux.vnet.ibm.com): >> +/* >> + * xattr_list_userns_rewrite - Rewrite list of xattr names for user namespaces >> + * or determine needed size for attribute list >> + * in case size == 0 >> + * >> + * In a user namespace we do not present all extended attributes to the >> + * user. We filter out those that are in the list of userns supported xattr. >> + * Besides that we filter out those with @uid= when there is no mapping >> + * for that uid in the current user namespace. >> + * >> + * @list: list of 0-byte separated xattr names >> + * @size: the size of the list; may be 0 to determine needed list size >> + * @list_maxlen: allocated buffer size of list >> + */ >> +static ssize_t >> +xattr_list_userns_rewrite(char *list, ssize_t size, size_t list_maxlen) >> +{ >> + char *nlist = NULL; >> + size_t s_off, len, nlen; >> + ssize_t d_off; >> + char *name, *newname; >> + >> + if (!list || size < 0 || current_user_ns() == &init_user_ns) >> + return size; >> + >> + if (size) { >> + nlist = kmalloc(list_maxlen, GFP_KERNEL); >> + if (!nlist) >> + return -ENOMEM; >> + } >> + >> + s_off = d_off = 0; >> + while (s_off < size || size == 0) { >> + name = &list[s_off]; >> + >> + len = strlen(name); >> + if (!len) >> + break; >> + >> + if (xattr_is_userns_supported(name, false) >= 0) >> + newname = name; >> + else { >> + newname = xattr_rewrite_userns_xattr(name); > Why are you doing this here? If we get here it means that > xattr_is_userns_supported() returned < 0, meaning name is > not userns-supported. So xattr_rewrite_userns_xattr() will > just return name. Am I missing something? xattr_is_userns_support(name, false) does a _full string match_ rather than a prefix match and will only return >= 0 for security.capability. This case handles the hosts's security.capability which 'shines through' for read and needs to be listed. Only in this case we set newname=name. In the else branch we handle security.capability@uid=1000 and rewrite that to security.capability for root mapping to uid=1000. > >> + if (IS_ERR(newname)) { >> + d_off = PTR_ERR(newname); >> + goto out_free; >> + } >> + } >> + if (newname && !xattr_list_contains(nlist, d_off, newname)) { > Now here, if name was recalculated to @newname, and @newname is > found in the nlist, that should raise an error right? Something > fishy is going on? If security.capability is set on a file but the container doesn't have security.capability@uid=1000, we still need to list the former here. However, we end up with duplicates if security.capability is there and security.capability@uid=1000 is also there and root is mapped to uid=1000. Both would be shown as security.capability inside the container. In this case we need to filter. I think the code is correct. More problematic is a memory leak in the error case. Will fix that. > >> + nlen = strlen(newname); >> + >> + if (nlist) { >> + if (nlen + 1 > list_maxlen) > d_off needs to be set to -ERANGE here. Fixed. > >> + break; >> + strcpy(&nlist[d_off], newname); >> + } >> + >> + d_off += nlen + 1; >> + if (newname != name) >> + kfree(newname); >> + } >> + s_off += len + 1; >> + } >> + if (nlist) >> + memcpy(list, nlist, d_off); >> +out_free: >> + kfree(nlist); >> + >> + return d_off; >> +}