linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Cc: Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: new ...at() flag: AT_NO_JUMPS
Date: Fri, 5 May 2017 01:30:30 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170505003030.GM29622@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAG48ez0wccvQ5i+XN_Q_yA9_ZwSaGb-W+zky0KQb_GU=9G+MSw@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 07:36:52PM +0200, Jann Horn wrote:

> Oh, nice!
> 
> It looks like this is somewhat similar to the old O_BENEATH proposal,
> but because the intentions behind the proposals are different
> (application sandboxing versus permitting an application to restrict its
> own filesystem accesses), the semantics differ: AT_NO_JUMPS
> doesn't prevent starting the path with "/", but does prevent mountpoint
> traversal. Is that correct?

It prevents both, actually - I missed that in description, but this
        if (unlikely(nd->flags & LOOKUP_NO_JUMPS))
                return -ELOOP;
in nd_jump_root() affects absolute pathnames same way as it affects
absolute symlinks.

It's not quite O_BENEATH, and IMO it's saner that way - a/b/c/../d is
bloody well allowed, and so are relative symlinks that do not lead out of
the subtree.  If somebody has a good argument in favour of flat-out
ban on .. (_other_ than "other guys do it that way, and it doesn't need
to make sense 'cuz security!!1!!!", please), I'd be glad to hear it.

As for mountpoint crossing...  it might make sense to split those.
O_BENEATH allowed it, and if we want AT_BENEATH to match that - let's
do it.  Then this one would become AT_BENEATH | AT_XDEV (the latter named
after find(1) option, obviously).

So how about this:

AT_BENEATH:
	* no absolute pathnames
	* no absolute symlinks
	* no procfs-style symlinks
	* no traversal of .. when we are at the same place where we'd started
(dir/../file is allowed, dir/../.. isn't)

AT_XDEV:
	* no mountpoint crossing allowed

For the latter I would prefer -EXDEV, for obvious reasons.  For the former...
not sure.  I'm not too happy about -ELOOP, but -EPERM (as with O_BENEATH)
is an atrocity - it's even more overloaded.

Suggestions?

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-05-05  0:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-04-29 22:04 Al Viro
2017-04-29 23:17 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-04-29 23:25   ` Al Viro
2017-04-30  1:13     ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-04-30  4:38     ` Matthew Wilcox
2017-04-30 16:10       ` Al Viro
2017-05-01  4:52         ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-01  5:15           ` Al Viro
2017-05-01 17:36 ` Jann Horn
2017-05-01 19:37   ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-05  0:30   ` Al Viro [this message]
2017-05-05  0:44     ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-05  1:06       ` Al Viro
2017-05-05  1:27     ` Linus Torvalds
2017-05-05  3:00       ` Al Viro
2017-05-05  4:01         ` Linus Torvalds
2017-05-05  4:31           ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-05  2:47     ` Jann Horn
2017-05-05  3:46       ` Linus Torvalds
2017-05-05  4:39         ` Al Viro
2017-05-05  4:44           ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-05-05 20:04             ` Eric W. Biederman
2017-05-05 20:28           ` Eric W. Biederman
2017-05-08 19:34             ` Mickaël Salaün
2017-05-18  8:50     ` David Drysdale
2017-09-10 20:26 Jürg Billeter

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=20170505003030.GM29622@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
    --to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=jannh@google.com \
    --cc=linux-api@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --subject='Re: new ...at() flag: AT_NO_JUMPS' \
    /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

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).