From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Gobinda Charan Maji <gobinda.cemk07@gmail.com>
Cc: Linux Next <linux-next@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sysfs: tightened sysfs permission checks
Date: Sat, 02 May 2015 06:45:52 +0930 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87r3r02e47.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1430482103-21248-1-git-send-email-gobinda.cemk07@gmail.com>
Gobinda Charan Maji <gobinda.cemk07@gmail.com> writes:
> There were some inconsistency in restriction to VERIFY_OCTAL_PERMISSIONS().
> Previously the test was "User perms >= group perms >= other perms". The
> permission field of User, Group or Other consists of three bits. LSB is
> EXECUTE permission, MSB is READ permission and the middle bit is WRITE
> permission. But logically WRITE is "more privileged" than READ.
>
> Say for example, permission value is "0430". Here User has only READ
> permission whereas Group has both WRITE and EXECUTE permission.
>
> So, the checks could be tightened and the tests are separated to
> USER_READABLE >= GROUP_READABLE >= OTHER_READABLE,
> USER_WRITABLE >= GROUP_WRITABLE and OTHER_WRITABLE is not permitted.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gobinda Charan Maji <gobinda.cemk07@gmail.com>
Thanks, applied!
Cheers,
Rusty.
> ---
> include/linux/kernel.h | 18 ++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/kernel.h b/include/linux/kernel.h
> index 3a5b48e..cd54b35 100644
> --- a/include/linux/kernel.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kernel.h
> @@ -818,13 +818,15 @@ static inline void ftrace_dump(enum ftrace_dump_mode oops_dump_mode) { }
> #endif
>
> /* Permissions on a sysfs file: you didn't miss the 0 prefix did you? */
> -#define VERIFY_OCTAL_PERMISSIONS(perms) \
> - (BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO((perms) < 0) + \
> - BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO((perms) > 0777) + \
> - /* User perms >= group perms >= other perms */ \
> - BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO(((perms) >> 6) < (((perms) >> 3) & 7)) + \
> - BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO((((perms) >> 3) & 7) < ((perms) & 7)) + \
> - /* Other writable? Generally considered a bad idea. */ \
> - BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO((perms) & 2) + \
> +#define VERIFY_OCTAL_PERMISSIONS(perms) \
> + (BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO((perms) < 0) + \
> + BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO((perms) > 0777) + \
> + /* USER_READABLE >= GROUP_READABLE >= OTHER_READABLE */ \
> + BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO((((perms) >> 6) & 4) < (((perms) >> 3) & 4)) + \
> + BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO((((perms) >> 3) & 4) < ((perms) & 4)) + \
> + /* USER_WRITABLE >= GROUP_WRITABLE */ \
> + BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO((((perms) >> 6) & 2) < (((perms) >> 3) & 2)) + \
> + /* OTHER_WRITABLE? Generally considered a bad idea. */ \
> + BUILD_BUG_ON_ZERO((perms) & 2) + \
> (perms))
> #endif
> --
> 1.8.1.4
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-01 23:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-01 12:08 [PATCH] sysfs: tightened sysfs permission checks Gobinda Charan Maji
2015-05-01 21:15 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
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=87r3r02e47.fsf@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=gobinda.cemk07@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
/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 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).