From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754275AbaF3Ptc (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:49:32 -0400 Received: from mail-la0-f74.google.com ([209.85.215.74]:36647 "EHLO mail-la0-f74.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754141AbaF3Pta (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jun 2014 11:49:30 -0400 Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 16:49:28 +0100 From: David Drysdale To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Al Viro , LSM List , Greg Kroah-Hartman , James Morris , Kees Cook , Linux API , Meredydd Luff , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] fs: add O_BENEATH_ONLY flag to openat(2) Message-ID: <20140630154928.GB10375@google.com> References: <1404124096-21445-1-git-send-email-drysdale@google.com> <1404124096-21445-2-git-send-email-drysdale@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 07:49:41AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Jun 30, 2014 3:36 AM, "David Drysdale" wrote: > > > > Add a new O_BENEATH_ONLY flag for openat(2) which restricts the > > provided path, rejecting (with -EACCES) paths that are not beneath > > the provided dfd. In particular, reject: > > - paths that contain .. components > > - paths that begin with / > > - symlinks that have paths as above. > > I like this a lot. However, I think I'd like it even better if it > were AT_BENEATH_ONLY so that it could be added to the rest of the *at > family. > > --Andy Wouldn't it need to be both O_BENEATH_ONLY (for openat()) and AT_BENEATH_ONLY (for other *at() functions), like O_NOFOLLOW and AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW? (I.e. aren't the AT_* flags in a different numbering space than O_* flags?) Or am I misunderstanding?