From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, FSL_HELO_FAKE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1781AC2D0DB for ; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 20:14:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.sourceforge.net (lists.sourceforge.net [216.105.38.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D66062071E; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 20:14:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sourceforge.net header.i=@sourceforge.net header.b="eWiBD3Vq"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=sf.net header.i=@sf.net header.b="MqpbUPqE"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="1ag7/2DS" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D66062071E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iv5LJ-000518-0z; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 20:14:13 +0000 Received: from [172.30.20.202] (helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iv5LH-00050v-Bl for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 20:14:11 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceforge.net; s=x; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=A8ltrmZEPSfl6gI76hjwgXcvjEOjtPUe3F/O3vP39GM=; b=eWiBD3VqUHOhD5RLDPeRRTC2Ru BrPnHArov6nxx1ae/zV8P35h/5uejguPrX/hVVriXm2BdcMxZsRHoLB5DEgi6YwmsjrQYPrTvLegB wF9NAztxWx+7nCMWErajsKCDk3ApN6p5pXdg5lutQ3cLYMm3R6ItdZgjgbMvMveyZ2W8=; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sf.net; s=x ; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To :From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=A8ltrmZEPSfl6gI76hjwgXcvjEOjtPUe3F/O3vP39GM=; b=MqpbUPqEvfqAf9TcSV+9zUMl+1 4+lzETzzBshS5TRLPLSRDcKMiyDaUq3cqD7nSTs+MLdZuev4pC9Sp5j7KVQdqwk7cM4RMNtzObVVp VzyhndrsZOMAYwqt1fL7AKcfEFU6BvjYt1IiwufeX/puhlyfyPO9k4RZL0K3PlgTXjU0=; Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by sfi-mx-3.v28.lw.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92.2) id 1iv5LG-00HOey-4k for linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 20:14:11 +0000 Received: from gmail.com (unknown [104.132.1.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1F8CF2071E; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 20:14:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1579896844; bh=BXwKT7PuUAxXdQBtcYCaPasA/6uX1OMir4E6yh0LA3k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=1ag7/2DSoxG5KYU0EMVWB64o75K0btoF+qRMCO5k9cTMqUywqJBdCg/sUprpKIHv/ 9MepeQSjc6pe8xJdw8+LoNAgcQY5x8NUgXg6RHWOLoXD7dmmnthVG6ewye8WF1rbAv 53XYtcyTT0ewAW3ULL2QSG0sBV/ytCRp6aZzLJeA= Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2020 12:14:02 -0800 From: Eric Biggers To: Richard Weinberger , linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Message-ID: <20200124201317.GC41762@gmail.com> References: <20200120223201.241390-1-ebiggers@kernel.org> <20200120223201.241390-5-ebiggers@kernel.org> <20200122003014.GA180824@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200122003014.GA180824@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Headers-End: 1iv5LG-00HOey-4k Subject: Re: [f2fs-dev] [PATCH v5 4/6] ubifs: don't trigger assertion on invalid no-key filename X-BeenThere: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Daniel Rosenberg , kernel-team@android.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-fscrypt@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: linux-f2fs-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 04:30:15PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 02:31:59PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote: > > From: Eric Biggers > > > > If userspace provides an invalid fscrypt no-key filename which encodes a > > hash value with any of the UBIFS node type bits set (i.e. the high 3 > > bits), gracefully report ENOENT rather than triggering ubifs_assert(). > > > > Test case with kvm-xfstests shell: > > > > . fs/ubifs/config > > . ~/xfstests/common/encrypt > > dev=$(__blkdev_to_ubi_volume /dev/vdc) > > ubiupdatevol $dev -t > > mount $dev /mnt -t ubifs > > mkdir /mnt/edir > > xfs_io -c set_encpolicy /mnt/edir > > rm /mnt/edir/_,,,,,DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA > > > > With the bug, the following assertion fails on the 'rm' command: > > > > [ 19.066048] UBIFS error (ubi0:0 pid 379): ubifs_assert_failed: UBIFS assert failed: !(hash & ~UBIFS_S_KEY_HASH_MASK), in fs/ubifs/key.h:170 > > > > Fixes: f4f61d2cc6d8 ("ubifs: Implement encrypted filenames") > > Cc: # v4.10+ > > Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers > > Richard, can you review the two UBIFS patches in this series, and if you're okay > with them, provide Acked-by's so that we can take them through the fscrypt tree? > They don't conflict with anything currently in the UBIFS tree. > Richard, any objection to us taking these patches through the fscrypt tree? - Eric _______________________________________________ Linux-f2fs-devel mailing list Linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-f2fs-devel