Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756730AbaGIWmc (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jul 2014 18:42:32 -0400 Received: from elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.65]:55344 "EHLO elasmtp-kukur.atl.sa.earthlink.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756693AbaGIWma convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jul 2014 18:42:30 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=OaXLkaj6WUq3BGektX5cRUTEzWxIz3UovcstTzHD4yV3sDX4RDA3H+G9eUqonDmb; h=Received:From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Thread-Index:Content-Language:X-Antivirus-Status:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; From: "Frank Filz" To: "'Trond Myklebust'" Cc: "'Linux NFS Mailing List'" , "'Linux Kernel mailing list'" References: <1404942892-18323-1-git-send-email-ffilzlnx@mindspring.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/1] Fix permission checking by NFS client for open-create with mode 000 Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 15:42:22 -0700 Message-ID: <033801cf9bc7$0d7ee190$287ca4b0$@mindspring.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Thread-Index: AQGbOTJ6MUf6FOx4w+cyNjCBvBXZJAJkOHk0m+34UJA= Content-Language: en-us X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 140709-0, 07/09/2014), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-ELNK-Trace: 136157f01908a8929c7f779228e2f6aeda0071232e20db4ded48dc2eadf00c781ed2204f5bd6c0ba350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 71.236.153.111 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Frank S. Filz > wrote: > > From: "Frank S. Filz" > > > > The NFS v4 client sends a COMPOUND with an OPEN and an ACCESS. > > > > The ACCESS is required to verify an open for read is actually allowed > > because RFC 3530 indicates OPEN for read only must succeed for an > > execute only file. > > > > The old code expected to have read access if the requested access was > > O_RDWR. > > > > We can expect the OPEN to properly permission check as long as the > > open is O_WRONLY or O_RDWR. > > > > Signed-off-by: Frank S. Filz > > --- > > fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++----- > > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c index > > 4bf3d97..9742054 100644 > > --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c > > +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c > > @@ -1966,15 +1966,30 @@ static int nfs4_opendata_access(struct > rpc_cred *cred, > > return 0; > > > > mask = 0; > > - /* don't check MAY_WRITE - a newly created file may not have > > - * write mode bits, but POSIX allows the creating process to write. > > - * use openflags to check for exec, because fmode won't > > - * always have FMODE_EXEC set when file open for exec. */ > > + /* Don't trust the permission check on OPEN if open for exec or for > > + * read only. Since FMODE_EXEC doesn't go across the wire, the server > > + * has no way to distinguish between an open to read an executable > file > > + * and an open to read a readable file. Write access is properly checked > > + * and permission SHOULD always be granted if the file was created as > a > > + * result of this OPEN, no matter what mode the file was created with. > > + * > > + * NOTE: If the case of a OPEN CREATE READ-ONLY with a mode that > does > > + * not allow read access, this test will produce an incorrect > > + * EACCES error. > > + */ > > if (openflags & __FMODE_EXEC) { > > /* ONLY check for exec rights */ > > mask = MAY_EXEC; > > - } else if (fmode & FMODE_READ) > > + } else if (!(fmode & FMODE_WRITE)) { > > + /* In case the file was execute only, check for read permission > > + * ONLY if write access was not requested. It is expected that > > + * an OPEN for write will fail if the file is execute only. > > + * Note that if the file was newly created, the fmode SHOULD > > + * include FMODE_WRITE, especially if the file will be created > > + * with a restrictive mode. > > + */ > > mask = MAY_READ; > > + } > > This looks wrong. AFAICS it will allow you to open an existing file which has - > wx permissions (i.e. no read permissions) for O_RDWR. That should not be > permitted under POSIX rules. The server permission checks the OPEN, this only affects the subsequent ACCESS. The server will fail the OPEN with NFS4_ERR_ACCESS if the open is for read/write and the file has write-execute permission. See the test program I subsequently posted. The program demonstrates that open O_RDWR on a mode=0333 file fails as expected. (Tested on both Ganesha and knfsd). Frank -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/