Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1579897 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v27 03/21] vfs: Add MAY_DELETE_SELF and MAY_DELETE_CHILD permission flags

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH v27 03/21] vfs: Add MAY_DELETE_SELF and MAY_DELETE_CHILD  permission flags Andreas Gruenbacher <agruenba@redhat.com> - 2017-02-13 16:50 +0100

#1579897 — Re: [PATCH v27 03/21] vfs: Add MAY_DELETE_SELF and MAY_DELETE_CHILD permission flags

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Andreas Gruenbacher
> <agruenba@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Normally, deleting a file requires MAY_WRITE access to the parent
>> directory.  With richacls, a file may be deleted with MAY_DELETE_CHILD access
>> to the parent directory or with MAY_DELETE_SELF access to the file.
>>
>> To support that, pass the MAY_DELETE_CHILD mask flag to inode_permission()
>> when checking for delete access inside a directory, and MAY_DELETE_SELF
>> when checking for delete access to a file itself.
>>
>> The MAY_DELETE_SELF permission overrides the sticky directory check.
>
> And MAY_DELETE_SELF seems totally inappropriate to any kind of rename,
> since from the point of view of the inode we are not doing anything at
> all.  The modifications are all in the parent(s), and that's where the
> permission checks need to be.
>
>> @@ -2780,14 +2780,20 @@ static int may_delete_or_replace(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *victim,
>>         BUG_ON(victim->d_parent->d_inode != dir);
>>         audit_inode_child(dir, victim, AUDIT_TYPE_CHILD_DELETE);
>>
>> -       error = inode_permission(dir, mask);
>> +       error = inode_permission(dir, mask | MAY_WRITE | MAY_DELETE_CHILD);
>> +       if (!error && check_sticky(dir, inode))
>> +               error = -EPERM;
>> +       if (error && IS_RICHACL(inode) &&
>> +           inode_permission(inode, MAY_DELETE_SELF) == 0 &&
>> +           inode_permission(dir, mask) == 0)
>> +               error = 0;
>
> Why is MAY_WRITE missing here?  Everything not aware of
> MAY_DELETE_SELF (e.g. LSMs) will still need MAY_WRITE otherwise this
> is going to be a loophole.

Hmm, this has indeed slipped me. Should be fixed in the version I've
just posted.

Many thanks for the review.

Andreas

[toc] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web