linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
	Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: new ...at() flag: AT_NO_JUMPS
Date: Thu, 4 May 2017 21:31:08 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALCETrVGC7p8J9gDKLq5R=5K0cXVRsv_4JbTUDnhyD2F4epu2w@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+55aFy8faOrivrKREJHVd2Ua5VsuOz+CKQu=Y+k_xQHU5TqGA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 9:01 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 8:00 PM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>> That could still allow crossing mount-points, but only if they are
>>> non-bind mounts and cannot let us escape.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure if that's testable, though.
>>
>> This one isn't, unfortunately - there is no difference between bind and
>> no-bind; vfsmounts form a tree and both normal mount and bind add leaves
>> to it.  Moreover, mount -t ext2 /dev/sdc7 /mnt; mount -t ext2 /dev/sdc7 /tmp/a
>> yield the same state as mount -t ext2 /dev/sdc7; mount --bind /mnt /tmp/a.
>> There is no way to tell the difference, simply because there *is* no
>> difference.  Moreover, either can be followed by umount /mnt and you'll get
>> the same state as you would have after a solitary mount of the same fs on
>> /tmp/a.
>
> Fair enough.
>
>> Ho-hum...  So:
>>
>>                         AT_BENEATH      AT_XDEV         AT_NO_SYMLINKS
>> absolute pathname:      EXDEV
>> non-relative symlink:   EXDEV           ?               ELOOP
>> relative symlink:                                       ELOOP
>> .. from starting point: EXDEV
>> .. crossing mountpoint:                 EXDEV
>> crossing into mountpoint:               EXDEV
>>
>> 1) What should AT_XDEV do about absolute symlinks?  Nothing special?  EXDEV?
>> EXDEV if we are not on root?
>
> My mental model would say that AT_XDEV without AT_BENEATH would
> _logically_ result in "EXDEV if / is a different vfsmount", accept the
> absolute path otherwise.
>
> But honestly, just returning EXDEV unconditionally for an absolute
> symlink might just be the simpler and more straightforward thing to
> do.
>
> Because testing the particular vfsmount of / simply doesn't seem to be
> a very useful operation.  I dunno.

My intuition is that, regardless of whether it's obviously useful to
test the vfsmount, we should allow / if it's the same mount for
orthogonality and because it seems more likely to be the expected
behavior.

>
>> 3) What effect should AT_NO_SYMLINKS have upon the final component?  Same
>> as AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW?
>
> I actually would suggest "error if it's followed".
>
> So if you use AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW | AT_NO_SYMLINKS, then you do *not*
> get an error if the last component (but nothing before it) is a
> symlink, and the end result is the symlink itself.
>
> If you use just AT_NO_SYMLINKS, then the lack of NOFOLLOW implies that
> you'd follow the symlink to look it up, and then AT_NO_SYMLINKS means
> that you get an error (ELOOP).
>
> So the user gets to choose, and gets to basically indicate whether
> it's fine to end at a dangling symlink or not. Which is exactly what
> AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW is all about.

Sounds reasonable to me.

--Andy

  reply	other threads:[~2017-05-05  4:31 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
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 [this message]
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='CALCETrVGC7p8J9gDKLq5R=5K0cXVRsv_4JbTUDnhyD2F4epu2w@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=luto@kernel.org \
    --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 \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --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).