Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751603AbXAVKtx (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jan 2007 05:49:53 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751617AbXAVKtx (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jan 2007 05:49:53 -0500 Received: from relay01.mail-hub.dodo.com.au ([203.220.32.149]:46636 "EHLO relay01.mail-hub.dodo.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751603AbXAVKtw (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jan 2007 05:49:52 -0500 From: Grant Coady To: Santiago Garcia Mantinan Cc: Willy Tarreau , Santiago Garcia Mantinan , Grant Coady , dann frazier , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, debian-kernel@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: problems with latest smbfs changes on 2.4.34 and security backports Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 21:49:50 +1100 Organization: http://bugsplatter.mine.nu/ Reply-To: Grant Coady Message-ID: References: <20070117100030.GA11251@clandestino.aytolacoruna.es> <20070117215519.GX24090@1wt.eu> <20070119010040.GR16053@colo> <20070120010544.GY26210@colo> <20070121230321.GC2480@1wt.eu> <20070122085400.GA16302@clandestino.aytolacoruna.es> <20070122091816.GA5144@1wt.eu> <20070122093630.GA20431@clandestino.aytolacoruna.es> In-Reply-To: <20070122093630.GA20431@clandestino.aytolacoruna.es> X-Mailer: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2097 Lines: 46 On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 10:36:30 +0100, Santiago Garcia Mantinan wrote: >> > As you can see I now can see the symbolic links perfectly and they work as >> > expected. >> > >> > In fact, this patch is working so well that it poses a security risk, as now >> > the devices on my /mnt/dev directory are not only seen as devices (like they >> > were seen on 2.4.33) but they also work (which didn't happen on 2.4.33). >> >> Why do you consider this a security problem ? Is any user able to create a >> device entry with enough permissions ? As a general rule of thumb, networked >> file systems should be mounted with the "nodev" option. > >You are completely right on that, it is just that I thought those devices >didn't work on 2.4.33, but I just retested again and they work ok, only that >they were not working to me on the PC I tested the other day and it was >because of a nodev option :-) just that. > >So... I have finised with my tests, I have tested an x86 client on which it >worked ok, just like on the PowerPC client, both working perfectly just like >they used to do on 2.4.33. > >> Grant, just to be sure, are you really certain that you tried the fixed kernel ? >> It is possible that you booted a wrong kernel during one of your tests. I'm >> intrigued by the fact that it changed nothing for you and that it fixed the >> problem for Santiago. > >Maybe he had also applied some of the earlier patches you had sent and that >I did not apply to mine? > >Just to clear things up a bit, I'm sure I'm with the 2.4.34 kernel and... >I'm running a pristine kernel with just this latest patch applied, the one >that changes S_IFREG for (fattr->f_mode & S_IFMT). Same kernel + patch here for latest results posting :) We seem to get similar results now -- though I query the file execute bits coming up. Grant. > >Regards... - 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/