linux/fs/fuse/inode.c

2193 lines
53 KiB

[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fuse: fix runtime warning on truncate_folio_batch_exceptionals() The WARN_ON_ONCE is introduced on truncate_folio_batch_exceptionals() to capture whether the filesystem has removed all DAX entries or not. And the fix has been applied on the filesystem xfs and ext4 by the commit 0e2f80afcfa6 ("fs/dax: ensure all pages are idle prior to filesystem unmount"). Apply the missed fix on filesystem fuse to fix the runtime warning: [ 2.011450] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 2.011873] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 145 at mm/truncate.c:89 truncate_folio_batch_exceptionals+0x272/0x2b0 [ 2.012468] Modules linked in: [ 2.012718] CPU: 0 UID: 1000 PID: 145 Comm: weston Not tainted 6.16.0-rc2-WSL2-STABLE #2 PREEMPT(undef) [ 2.013292] RIP: 0010:truncate_folio_batch_exceptionals+0x272/0x2b0 [ 2.013704] Code: 48 63 d0 41 29 c5 48 8d 1c d5 00 00 00 00 4e 8d 6c 2a 01 49 c1 e5 03 eb 09 48 83 c3 08 49 39 dd 74 83 41 f6 44 1c 08 01 74 ef <0f> 0b 49 8b 34 1e 48 89 ef e8 10 a2 17 00 eb df 48 8b 7d 00 e8 35 [ 2.014845] RSP: 0018:ffffa47ec33f3b10 EFLAGS: 00010202 [ 2.015279] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 0000000000000000 [ 2.015884] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffa47ec33f3ca0 RDI: ffff98aa44f3fa80 [ 2.016377] RBP: ffff98aa44f3fbf0 R08: ffffa47ec33f3ba8 R09: 0000000000000000 [ 2.016942] R10: 0000000000000001 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: ffffa47ec33f3ca0 [ 2.017437] R13: 0000000000000008 R14: ffffa47ec33f3ba8 R15: 0000000000000000 [ 2.017972] FS: 000079ce006afa40(0000) GS:ffff98aade441000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [ 2.018510] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [ 2.018987] CR2: 000079ce03e74000 CR3: 000000010784f006 CR4: 0000000000372eb0 [ 2.019518] Call Trace: [ 2.019729] <TASK> [ 2.019901] truncate_inode_pages_range+0xd8/0x400 [ 2.020280] ? timerqueue_add+0x66/0xb0 [ 2.020574] ? get_nohz_timer_target+0x2a/0x140 [ 2.020904] ? timerqueue_add+0x66/0xb0 [ 2.021231] ? timerqueue_del+0x2e/0x50 [ 2.021646] ? __remove_hrtimer+0x39/0x90 [ 2.022017] ? srso_alias_untrain_ret+0x1/0x10 [ 2.022497] ? psi_group_change+0x136/0x350 [ 2.023046] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0xe/0x30 [ 2.023514] ? finish_task_switch.isra.0+0x8d/0x280 [ 2.024068] ? __schedule+0x532/0xbd0 [ 2.024551] fuse_evict_inode+0x29/0x190 [ 2.025131] evict+0x100/0x270 [ 2.025641] ? _atomic_dec_and_lock+0x39/0x50 [ 2.026316] ? __pfx_generic_delete_inode+0x10/0x10 [ 2.026843] __dentry_kill+0x71/0x180 [ 2.027335] dput+0xeb/0x1b0 [ 2.027725] __fput+0x136/0x2b0 [ 2.028054] __x64_sys_close+0x3d/0x80 [ 2.028469] do_syscall_64+0x6d/0x1b0 [ 2.028832] ? clear_bhb_loop+0x30/0x80 [ 2.029182] ? clear_bhb_loop+0x30/0x80 [ 2.029533] ? clear_bhb_loop+0x30/0x80 [ 2.029902] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e [ 2.030423] RIP: 0033:0x79ce03d0d067 [ 2.030820] Code: b8 ff ff ff ff e9 3e ff ff ff 66 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 f3 0f 1e fa 64 8b 04 25 18 00 00 00 85 c0 75 10 b8 03 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 41 c3 48 83 ec 18 89 7c 24 0c e8 c3 a7 f8 ff [ 2.032354] RSP: 002b:00007ffef0498948 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000003 [ 2.032939] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007ffef0498960 RCX: 000079ce03d0d067 [ 2.033612] RDX: 0000000000000003 RSI: 0000000000001000 RDI: 000000000000000d [ 2.034289] RBP: 00007ffef0498a30 R08: 000000000000000d R09: 0000000000000000 [ 2.034944] R10: 00007ffef0498978 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000001 [ 2.035610] R13: 00007ffef0498960 R14: 000079ce03e09ce0 R15: 0000000000000003 [ 2.036301] </TASK> [ 2.036532] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250621171507.3770-1-haiyuewa@163.com Fixes: bde708f1a65d ("fs/dax: always remove DAX page-cache entries when breaking layouts") Signed-off-by: Haiyue Wang <haiyuewa@163.com> Cc: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2025-06-22 01:13:51 +08:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fuse: add default_request_timeout and max_request_timeout sysctls Introduce two new sysctls, "default_request_timeout" and "max_request_timeout". These control how long (in seconds) a server can take to reply to a request. If the server does not reply by the timeout, then the connection will be aborted. The upper bound on these sysctl values is 65535. "default_request_timeout" sets the default timeout if no timeout is specified by the fuse server on mount. 0 (default) indicates no default timeout should be enforced. If the server did specify a timeout, then default_request_timeout will be ignored. "max_request_timeout" sets the max amount of time the server may take to reply to a request. 0 (default) indicates no maximum timeout. If max_request_timeout is set and the fuse server attempts to set a timeout greater than max_request_timeout, the system will use max_request_timeout as the timeout. Similarly, if default_request_timeout is greater than max_request_timeout, the system will use max_request_timeout as the timeout. If the server does not request a timeout and default_request_timeout is set to 0 but max_request_timeout is set, then the timeout will be max_request_timeout. Please note that these timeouts are not 100% precise. The request may take roughly an extra FUSE_TIMEOUT_TIMER_FREQ seconds beyond the set max timeout due to how it's internally implemented. $ sysctl -a | grep fuse.default_request_timeout fs.fuse.default_request_timeout = 0 $ echo 65536 | sudo tee /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout tee: /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout: Invalid argument $ echo 65535 | sudo tee /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout 65535 $ sysctl -a | grep fuse.default_request_timeout fs.fuse.default_request_timeout = 65535 $ echo 0 | sudo tee /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout 0 $ sysctl -a | grep fuse.default_request_timeout fs.fuse.default_request_timeout = 0 [Luis Henriques: Limit the timeout to the range [FUSE_TIMEOUT_TIMER_FREQ, fuse_max_req_timeout]] Signed-off-by: Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Bernd Schubert <bschubert@ddn.com> Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> Reviewed-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org> Reviewed-by: Luis Henriques <luis@igalia.com> Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2025-01-22 13:55:28 -08:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fuse: fix runtime warning on truncate_folio_batch_exceptionals() The WARN_ON_ONCE is introduced on truncate_folio_batch_exceptionals() to capture whether the filesystem has removed all DAX entries or not. And the fix has been applied on the filesystem xfs and ext4 by the commit 0e2f80afcfa6 ("fs/dax: ensure all pages are idle prior to filesystem unmount"). Apply the missed fix on filesystem fuse to fix the runtime warning: [ 2.011450] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 2.011873] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 145 at mm/truncate.c:89 truncate_folio_batch_exceptionals+0x272/0x2b0 [ 2.012468] Modules linked in: [ 2.012718] CPU: 0 UID: 1000 PID: 145 Comm: weston Not tainted 6.16.0-rc2-WSL2-STABLE #2 PREEMPT(undef) [ 2.013292] RIP: 0010:truncate_folio_batch_exceptionals+0x272/0x2b0 [ 2.013704] Code: 48 63 d0 41 29 c5 48 8d 1c d5 00 00 00 00 4e 8d 6c 2a 01 49 c1 e5 03 eb 09 48 83 c3 08 49 39 dd 74 83 41 f6 44 1c 08 01 74 ef <0f> 0b 49 8b 34 1e 48 89 ef e8 10 a2 17 00 eb df 48 8b 7d 00 e8 35 [ 2.014845] RSP: 0018:ffffa47ec33f3b10 EFLAGS: 00010202 [ 2.015279] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 0000000000000000 [ 2.015884] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffa47ec33f3ca0 RDI: ffff98aa44f3fa80 [ 2.016377] RBP: ffff98aa44f3fbf0 R08: ffffa47ec33f3ba8 R09: 0000000000000000 [ 2.016942] R10: 0000000000000001 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: ffffa47ec33f3ca0 [ 2.017437] R13: 0000000000000008 R14: ffffa47ec33f3ba8 R15: 0000000000000000 [ 2.017972] FS: 000079ce006afa40(0000) GS:ffff98aade441000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 [ 2.018510] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 [ 2.018987] CR2: 000079ce03e74000 CR3: 000000010784f006 CR4: 0000000000372eb0 [ 2.019518] Call Trace: [ 2.019729] <TASK> [ 2.019901] truncate_inode_pages_range+0xd8/0x400 [ 2.020280] ? timerqueue_add+0x66/0xb0 [ 2.020574] ? get_nohz_timer_target+0x2a/0x140 [ 2.020904] ? timerqueue_add+0x66/0xb0 [ 2.021231] ? timerqueue_del+0x2e/0x50 [ 2.021646] ? __remove_hrtimer+0x39/0x90 [ 2.022017] ? srso_alias_untrain_ret+0x1/0x10 [ 2.022497] ? psi_group_change+0x136/0x350 [ 2.023046] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0xe/0x30 [ 2.023514] ? finish_task_switch.isra.0+0x8d/0x280 [ 2.024068] ? __schedule+0x532/0xbd0 [ 2.024551] fuse_evict_inode+0x29/0x190 [ 2.025131] evict+0x100/0x270 [ 2.025641] ? _atomic_dec_and_lock+0x39/0x50 [ 2.026316] ? __pfx_generic_delete_inode+0x10/0x10 [ 2.026843] __dentry_kill+0x71/0x180 [ 2.027335] dput+0xeb/0x1b0 [ 2.027725] __fput+0x136/0x2b0 [ 2.028054] __x64_sys_close+0x3d/0x80 [ 2.028469] do_syscall_64+0x6d/0x1b0 [ 2.028832] ? clear_bhb_loop+0x30/0x80 [ 2.029182] ? clear_bhb_loop+0x30/0x80 [ 2.029533] ? clear_bhb_loop+0x30/0x80 [ 2.029902] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e [ 2.030423] RIP: 0033:0x79ce03d0d067 [ 2.030820] Code: b8 ff ff ff ff e9 3e ff ff ff 66 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 f3 0f 1e fa 64 8b 04 25 18 00 00 00 85 c0 75 10 b8 03 00 00 00 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 41 c3 48 83 ec 18 89 7c 24 0c e8 c3 a7 f8 ff [ 2.032354] RSP: 002b:00007ffef0498948 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000003 [ 2.032939] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007ffef0498960 RCX: 000079ce03d0d067 [ 2.033612] RDX: 0000000000000003 RSI: 0000000000001000 RDI: 000000000000000d [ 2.034289] RBP: 00007ffef0498a30 R08: 000000000000000d R09: 0000000000000000 [ 2.034944] R10: 00007ffef0498978 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 0000000000000001 [ 2.035610] R13: 00007ffef0498960 R14: 000079ce03e09ce0 R15: 0000000000000003 [ 2.036301] </TASK> [ 2.036532] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20250621171507.3770-1-haiyuewa@163.com Fixes: bde708f1a65d ("fs/dax: always remove DAX page-cache entries when breaking layouts") Signed-off-by: Haiyue Wang <haiyuewa@163.com> Cc: Alistair Popple <apopple@nvidia.com> Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> Cc: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2025-06-22 01:13:51 +08:00
mm + fs: store shadow entries in page cache Reclaim will be leaving shadow entries in the page cache radix tree upon evicting the real page. As those pages are found from the LRU, an iput() can lead to the inode being freed concurrently. At this point, reclaim must no longer install shadow pages because the inode freeing code needs to ensure the page tree is really empty. Add an address_space flag, AS_EXITING, that the inode freeing code sets under the tree lock before doing the final truncate. Reclaim will check for this flag before installing shadow pages. Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> Reviewed-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> Reviewed-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> Cc: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com> Cc: Bob Liu <bob.liu@oracle.com> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> Cc: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> Cc: Greg Thelen <gthelen@google.com> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> Cc: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com> Cc: Luigi Semenzato <semenzato@google.com> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> Cc: Metin Doslu <metin@citusdata.com> Cc: Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com> Cc: Ozgun Erdogan <ozgun@citusdata.com> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Cc: Roman Gushchin <klamm@yandex-team.ru> Cc: Ryan Mallon <rmallon@gmail.com> Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2014-04-03 14:47:49 -07:00
Rename superblock flags (MS_xyz -> SB_xyz) This is a pure automated search-and-replace of the internal kernel superblock flags. The s_flags are now called SB_*, with the names and the values for the moment mirroring the MS_* flags that they're equivalent to. Note how the MS_xyz flags are the ones passed to the mount system call, while the SB_xyz flags are what we then use in sb->s_flags. The script to do this was: # places to look in; re security/*: it generally should *not* be # touched (that stuff parses mount(2) arguments directly), but # there are two places where we really deal with superblock flags. FILES="drivers/mtd drivers/staging/lustre fs ipc mm \ include/linux/fs.h include/uapi/linux/bfs_fs.h \ security/apparmor/apparmorfs.c security/apparmor/include/lib.h" # the list of MS_... constants SYMS="RDONLY NOSUID NODEV NOEXEC SYNCHRONOUS REMOUNT MANDLOCK \ DIRSYNC NOATIME NODIRATIME BIND MOVE REC VERBOSE SILENT \ POSIXACL UNBINDABLE PRIVATE SLAVE SHARED RELATIME KERNMOUNT \ I_VERSION STRICTATIME LAZYTIME SUBMOUNT NOREMOTELOCK NOSEC BORN \ ACTIVE NOUSER" SED_PROG= for i in $SYMS; do SED_PROG="$SED_PROG -e s/MS_$i/SB_$i/g"; done # we want files that contain at least one of MS_..., # with fs/namespace.c and fs/pnode.c excluded. L=$(for i in $SYMS; do git grep -w -l MS_$i $FILES; done| sort|uniq|grep -v '^fs/namespace.c'|grep -v '^fs/pnode.c') for f in $L; do sed -i $f $SED_PROG; done Requested-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2017-11-27 13:05:09 -08:00
fuse: check attributes staleness on fuse_iget() Function fuse_direntplus_link() might call fuse_iget() to initialize a new fuse_inode and change its attributes. If fi->attr_version is always initialized with 0, even if the attributes returned by the FUSE_READDIR request is staled, as the new fi->attr_version is 0, fuse_change_attributes will still set the staled attributes to inode. This wrong behaviour may cause file size inconsistency even when there is no changes from server-side. To reproduce the issue, consider the following 2 programs (A and B) are running concurrently, A B ---------------------------------- -------------------------------- { /fusemnt/dir/f is a file path in a fuse mount, the size of f is 0. } readdir(/fusemnt/dir) start //Daemon set size 0 to f direntry fallocate(f, 1024) stat(f) // B see size 1024 echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches readdir(/fusemnt/dir) reply to kernel Kernel set 0 to the I_NEW inode stat(f) // B see size 0 In the above case, only program B is modifying the file size, however, B observes file size changing between the 2 'readonly' stat() calls. To fix this issue, we should make sure readdirplus still follows the rule of attr_version staleness checking even if the fi->attr_version is lost due to inode eviction. To identify this situation, the new fc->evict_ctr is used to record whether the eviction of inodes occurs during the readdirplus request processing. If it does, the result of readdirplus may be inaccurate; otherwise, the result of readdirplus can be trusted. Although this may still lead to incorrect invalidation, considering the relatively low frequency of evict occurrences, it should be acceptable. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230711043405.66256-2-zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241114070905.48901-1-zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com/ Reported-by: Jiachen Zhang <zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com> Suggested-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Zhang Tianci <zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-11-18 18:16:00 +08:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fs: push sync_filesystem() down to the file system's remount_fs() Previously, the no-op "mount -o mount /dev/xxx" operation when the file system is already mounted read-write causes an implied, unconditional syncfs(). This seems pretty stupid, and it's certainly documented or guaraunteed to do this, nor is it particularly useful, except in the case where the file system was mounted rw and is getting remounted read-only. However, it's possible that there might be some file systems that are actually depending on this behavior. In most file systems, it's probably fine to only call sync_filesystem() when transitioning from read-write to read-only, and there are some file systems where this is not needed at all (for example, for a pseudo-filesystem or something like romfs). Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu> Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> Cc: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com> Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> Cc: Evgeniy Dushistov <dushistov@mail.ru> Cc: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> Cc: OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp> Cc: Anders Larsen <al@alarsen.net> Cc: Phillip Lougher <phillip@squashfs.org.uk> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Cc: Mikulas Patocka <mikulas@artax.karlin.mff.cuni.cz> Cc: Petr Vandrovec <petr@vandrovec.name> Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org Cc: samba-technical@lists.samba.org Cc: codalist@coda.cs.cmu.edu Cc: linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-f2fs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: cluster-devel@redhat.com Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Cc: jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-nilfs@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-ntfs-dev@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com Cc: reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org
2014-03-13 10:14:33 -04:00
fuse: support writable mmap Quoting Linus (3 years ago, FUSE inclusion discussions): "User-space filesystems are hard to get right. I'd claim that they are almost impossible, unless you limit them somehow (shared writable mappings are the nastiest part - if you don't have those, you can reasonably limit your problems by limiting the number of dirty pages you accept through normal "write()" calls)." Instead of attempting the impossible, I've just waited for the dirty page accounting infrastructure to materialize (thanks to Peter Zijlstra and others). This nicely solved the biggest problem: limiting the number of pages used for write caching. Some small details remained, however, which this largish patch attempts to address. It provides a page writeback implementation for fuse, which is completely safe against VM related deadlocks. Performance may not be very good for certain usage patterns, but generally it should be acceptable. It has been tested extensively with fsx-linux and bash-shared-mapping. Fuse page writeback design -------------------------- fuse_writepage() allocates a new temporary page with GFP_NOFS|__GFP_HIGHMEM. It copies the contents of the original page, and queues a WRITE request to the userspace filesystem using this temp page. The writeback is finished instantly from the MM's point of view: the page is removed from the radix trees, and the PageDirty and PageWriteback flags are cleared. For the duration of the actual write, the NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP counter is incremented. The per-bdi writeback count is not decremented until the actual write completes. On dirtying the page, fuse waits for a previous write to finish before proceeding. This makes sure, there can only be one temporary page used at a time for one cached page. This approach is wasteful in both memory and CPU bandwidth, so why is this complication needed? The basic problem is that there can be no guarantee about the time in which the userspace filesystem will complete a write. It may be buggy or even malicious, and fail to complete WRITE requests. We don't want unrelated parts of the system to grind to a halt in such cases. Also a filesystem may need additional resources (particularly memory) to complete a WRITE request. There's a great danger of a deadlock if that allocation may wait for the writepage to finish. Currently there are several cases where the kernel can block on page writeback: - allocation order is larger than PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER - page migration - throttle_vm_writeout (through NR_WRITEBACK) - sync(2) Of course in some cases (fsync, msync) we explicitly want to allow blocking. So for these cases new code has to be added to fuse, since the VM is not tracking writeback pages for us any more. As an extra safetly measure, the maximum dirty ratio allocated to a single fuse filesystem is set to 1% by default. This way one (or several) buggy or malicious fuse filesystems cannot slow down the rest of the system by hogging dirty memory. With appropriate privileges, this limit can be raised through '/sys/class/bdi/<bdi>/max_ratio'. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-30 00:54:41 -07:00
fuse: check attributes staleness on fuse_iget() Function fuse_direntplus_link() might call fuse_iget() to initialize a new fuse_inode and change its attributes. If fi->attr_version is always initialized with 0, even if the attributes returned by the FUSE_READDIR request is staled, as the new fi->attr_version is 0, fuse_change_attributes will still set the staled attributes to inode. This wrong behaviour may cause file size inconsistency even when there is no changes from server-side. To reproduce the issue, consider the following 2 programs (A and B) are running concurrently, A B ---------------------------------- -------------------------------- { /fusemnt/dir/f is a file path in a fuse mount, the size of f is 0. } readdir(/fusemnt/dir) start //Daemon set size 0 to f direntry fallocate(f, 1024) stat(f) // B see size 1024 echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches readdir(/fusemnt/dir) reply to kernel Kernel set 0 to the I_NEW inode stat(f) // B see size 0 In the above case, only program B is modifying the file size, however, B observes file size changing between the 2 'readonly' stat() calls. To fix this issue, we should make sure readdirplus still follows the rule of attr_version staleness checking even if the fi->attr_version is lost due to inode eviction. To identify this situation, the new fc->evict_ctr is used to record whether the eviction of inodes occurs during the readdirplus request processing. If it does, the result of readdirplus may be inaccurate; otherwise, the result of readdirplus can be trusted. Although this may still lead to incorrect invalidation, considering the relatively low frequency of evict occurrences, it should be acceptable. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230711043405.66256-2-zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241114070905.48901-1-zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com/ Reported-by: Jiachen Zhang <zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com> Suggested-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Zhang Tianci <zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-11-18 18:16:00 +08:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fuse: check attributes staleness on fuse_iget() Function fuse_direntplus_link() might call fuse_iget() to initialize a new fuse_inode and change its attributes. If fi->attr_version is always initialized with 0, even if the attributes returned by the FUSE_READDIR request is staled, as the new fi->attr_version is 0, fuse_change_attributes will still set the staled attributes to inode. This wrong behaviour may cause file size inconsistency even when there is no changes from server-side. To reproduce the issue, consider the following 2 programs (A and B) are running concurrently, A B ---------------------------------- -------------------------------- { /fusemnt/dir/f is a file path in a fuse mount, the size of f is 0. } readdir(/fusemnt/dir) start //Daemon set size 0 to f direntry fallocate(f, 1024) stat(f) // B see size 1024 echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches readdir(/fusemnt/dir) reply to kernel Kernel set 0 to the I_NEW inode stat(f) // B see size 0 In the above case, only program B is modifying the file size, however, B observes file size changing between the 2 'readonly' stat() calls. To fix this issue, we should make sure readdirplus still follows the rule of attr_version staleness checking even if the fi->attr_version is lost due to inode eviction. To identify this situation, the new fc->evict_ctr is used to record whether the eviction of inodes occurs during the readdirplus request processing. If it does, the result of readdirplus may be inaccurate; otherwise, the result of readdirplus can be trusted. Although this may still lead to incorrect invalidation, considering the relatively low frequency of evict occurrences, it should be acceptable. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230711043405.66256-2-zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241114070905.48901-1-zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com/ Reported-by: Jiachen Zhang <zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com> Suggested-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Zhang Tianci <zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-11-18 18:16:00 +08:00
fuse: Support fuse filesystems outside of init_user_ns In order to support mounts from namespaces other than init_user_ns, fuse must translate uids and gids to/from the userns of the process servicing requests on /dev/fuse. This patch does that, with a couple of restrictions on the namespace: - The userns for the fuse connection is fixed to the namespace from which /dev/fuse is opened. - The namespace must be the same as s_user_ns. These restrictions simplify the implementation by avoiding the need to pass around userns references and by allowing fuse to rely on the checks in setattr_prepare for ownership changes. Either restriction could be relaxed in the future if needed. For cuse the userns used is the opener of /dev/cuse. Semantically the cuse support does not appear safe for unprivileged users. Practically the permissions on /dev/cuse only make it accessible to the global root user. If something slips through the cracks in a user namespace the only users who will be able to use the cuse device are those users mapped into the user namespace. Translation in the posix acl is updated to use the uuser namespace of the filesystem. Avoiding cases which might bypass this translation is handled in a following change. This change is stronlgy based on a similar change from Seth Forshee and Dongsu Park. Cc: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com> Cc: Dongsu Park <dongsu@kinvolk.io> Signed-off-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2018-02-21 11:18:07 -06:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fuse: support SB_NOSEC flag to improve write performance Virtiofs can be slow with small writes if xattr are enabled and we are doing cached writes (No direct I/O). Ganesh Mahalingam noticed this. Some debugging showed that file_remove_privs() is called in cached write path on every write. And everytime it calls security_inode_need_killpriv() which results in call to __vfs_getxattr(XATTR_NAME_CAPS). And this goes to file server to fetch xattr. This extra round trip for every write slows down writes tremendously. Normally to avoid paying this penalty on every write, vfs has the notion of caching this information in inode (S_NOSEC). So vfs sets S_NOSEC, if filesystem opted for it using super block flag SB_NOSEC. And S_NOSEC is cleared when setuid/setgid bit is set or when security xattr is set on inode so that next time a write happens, we check inode again for clearing setuid/setgid bits as well clear any security.capability xattr. This seems to work well for local file systems but for remote file systems it is possible that VFS does not have full picture and a different client sets setuid/setgid bit or security.capability xattr on file and that means VFS information about S_NOSEC on another client will be stale. So for remote filesystems SB_NOSEC was disabled by default. Commit 9e1f1de02c22 ("more conservative S_NOSEC handling") mentioned that these filesystems can still make use of SB_NOSEC as long as they clear S_NOSEC when they are refreshing inode attriutes from server. So this patch tries to enable SB_NOSEC on fuse (regular fuse as well as virtiofs). And clear SB_NOSEC when we are refreshing inode attributes. This is enabled only if server supports FUSE_HANDLE_KILLPRIV_V2. This says that server will clear setuid/setgid/security.capability on chown/truncate/write as apporpriate. This should provide tighter coherency because now suid/sgid/ security.capability will be cleared even if fuse client cache has not seen these attrs. Basic idea is that fuse client will trigger suid/sgid/security.capability clearing based on its attr cache. But even if cache has gone stale, it is fine because FUSE_HANDLE_KILLPRIV_V2 will make sure WRITE clear suid/sgid/security.capability. We make this change only if server supports FUSE_HANDLE_KILLPRIV_V2. This should make sure that existing filesystems which might be relying on seucurity.capability always being queried from server are not impacted. This tighter coherency relies on WRITE showing up on server (and not being cached in guest). So writeback_cache mode will not provide that tight coherency and it is not recommended to use two together. Having said that it might work reasonably well for lot of use cases. This change improves random write performance very significantly. Running virtiofsd with cache=auto and following fio command: fio --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --name=test --filename=/mnt/virtiofs/random_read_write.fio --bs=4k --iodepth=64 --size=4G --readwrite=randwrite Bandwidth increases from around 50MB/s to around 250MB/s as a result of applying this patch. So improvement is very significant. Link: https://github.com/kata-containers/runtime/issues/2815 Reported-by: "Mahalingam, Ganesh" <ganesh.mahalingam@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2020-10-09 14:15:12 -04:00
fuse: support writable mmap Quoting Linus (3 years ago, FUSE inclusion discussions): "User-space filesystems are hard to get right. I'd claim that they are almost impossible, unless you limit them somehow (shared writable mappings are the nastiest part - if you don't have those, you can reasonably limit your problems by limiting the number of dirty pages you accept through normal "write()" calls)." Instead of attempting the impossible, I've just waited for the dirty page accounting infrastructure to materialize (thanks to Peter Zijlstra and others). This nicely solved the biggest problem: limiting the number of pages used for write caching. Some small details remained, however, which this largish patch attempts to address. It provides a page writeback implementation for fuse, which is completely safe against VM related deadlocks. Performance may not be very good for certain usage patterns, but generally it should be acceptable. It has been tested extensively with fsx-linux and bash-shared-mapping. Fuse page writeback design -------------------------- fuse_writepage() allocates a new temporary page with GFP_NOFS|__GFP_HIGHMEM. It copies the contents of the original page, and queues a WRITE request to the userspace filesystem using this temp page. The writeback is finished instantly from the MM's point of view: the page is removed from the radix trees, and the PageDirty and PageWriteback flags are cleared. For the duration of the actual write, the NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP counter is incremented. The per-bdi writeback count is not decremented until the actual write completes. On dirtying the page, fuse waits for a previous write to finish before proceeding. This makes sure, there can only be one temporary page used at a time for one cached page. This approach is wasteful in both memory and CPU bandwidth, so why is this complication needed? The basic problem is that there can be no guarantee about the time in which the userspace filesystem will complete a write. It may be buggy or even malicious, and fail to complete WRITE requests. We don't want unrelated parts of the system to grind to a halt in such cases. Also a filesystem may need additional resources (particularly memory) to complete a WRITE request. There's a great danger of a deadlock if that allocation may wait for the writepage to finish. Currently there are several cases where the kernel can block on page writeback: - allocation order is larger than PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER - page migration - throttle_vm_writeout (through NR_WRITEBACK) - sync(2) Of course in some cases (fsync, msync) we explicitly want to allow blocking. So for these cases new code has to be added to fuse, since the VM is not tracking writeback pages for us any more. As an extra safetly measure, the maximum dirty ratio allocated to a single fuse filesystem is set to 1% by default. This way one (or several) buggy or malicious fuse filesystems cannot slow down the rest of the system by hogging dirty memory. With appropriate privileges, this limit can be raised through '/sys/class/bdi/<bdi>/max_ratio'. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-30 00:54:41 -07:00
fuse: check attributes staleness on fuse_iget() Function fuse_direntplus_link() might call fuse_iget() to initialize a new fuse_inode and change its attributes. If fi->attr_version is always initialized with 0, even if the attributes returned by the FUSE_READDIR request is staled, as the new fi->attr_version is 0, fuse_change_attributes will still set the staled attributes to inode. This wrong behaviour may cause file size inconsistency even when there is no changes from server-side. To reproduce the issue, consider the following 2 programs (A and B) are running concurrently, A B ---------------------------------- -------------------------------- { /fusemnt/dir/f is a file path in a fuse mount, the size of f is 0. } readdir(/fusemnt/dir) start //Daemon set size 0 to f direntry fallocate(f, 1024) stat(f) // B see size 1024 echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches readdir(/fusemnt/dir) reply to kernel Kernel set 0 to the I_NEW inode stat(f) // B see size 0 In the above case, only program B is modifying the file size, however, B observes file size changing between the 2 'readonly' stat() calls. To fix this issue, we should make sure readdirplus still follows the rule of attr_version staleness checking even if the fi->attr_version is lost due to inode eviction. To identify this situation, the new fc->evict_ctr is used to record whether the eviction of inodes occurs during the readdirplus request processing. If it does, the result of readdirplus may be inaccurate; otherwise, the result of readdirplus can be trusted. Although this may still lead to incorrect invalidation, considering the relatively low frequency of evict occurrences, it should be acceptable. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230711043405.66256-2-zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241114070905.48901-1-zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com/ Reported-by: Jiachen Zhang <zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com> Suggested-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Zhang Tianci <zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-11-18 18:16:00 +08:00
fuse: support writable mmap Quoting Linus (3 years ago, FUSE inclusion discussions): "User-space filesystems are hard to get right. I'd claim that they are almost impossible, unless you limit them somehow (shared writable mappings are the nastiest part - if you don't have those, you can reasonably limit your problems by limiting the number of dirty pages you accept through normal "write()" calls)." Instead of attempting the impossible, I've just waited for the dirty page accounting infrastructure to materialize (thanks to Peter Zijlstra and others). This nicely solved the biggest problem: limiting the number of pages used for write caching. Some small details remained, however, which this largish patch attempts to address. It provides a page writeback implementation for fuse, which is completely safe against VM related deadlocks. Performance may not be very good for certain usage patterns, but generally it should be acceptable. It has been tested extensively with fsx-linux and bash-shared-mapping. Fuse page writeback design -------------------------- fuse_writepage() allocates a new temporary page with GFP_NOFS|__GFP_HIGHMEM. It copies the contents of the original page, and queues a WRITE request to the userspace filesystem using this temp page. The writeback is finished instantly from the MM's point of view: the page is removed from the radix trees, and the PageDirty and PageWriteback flags are cleared. For the duration of the actual write, the NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP counter is incremented. The per-bdi writeback count is not decremented until the actual write completes. On dirtying the page, fuse waits for a previous write to finish before proceeding. This makes sure, there can only be one temporary page used at a time for one cached page. This approach is wasteful in both memory and CPU bandwidth, so why is this complication needed? The basic problem is that there can be no guarantee about the time in which the userspace filesystem will complete a write. It may be buggy or even malicious, and fail to complete WRITE requests. We don't want unrelated parts of the system to grind to a halt in such cases. Also a filesystem may need additional resources (particularly memory) to complete a WRITE request. There's a great danger of a deadlock if that allocation may wait for the writepage to finish. Currently there are several cases where the kernel can block on page writeback: - allocation order is larger than PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER - page migration - throttle_vm_writeout (through NR_WRITEBACK) - sync(2) Of course in some cases (fsync, msync) we explicitly want to allow blocking. So for these cases new code has to be added to fuse, since the VM is not tracking writeback pages for us any more. As an extra safetly measure, the maximum dirty ratio allocated to a single fuse filesystem is set to 1% by default. This way one (or several) buggy or malicious fuse filesystems cannot slow down the rest of the system by hogging dirty memory. With appropriate privileges, this limit can be raised through '/sys/class/bdi/<bdi>/max_ratio'. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-30 00:54:41 -07:00
fuse: support writable mmap Quoting Linus (3 years ago, FUSE inclusion discussions): "User-space filesystems are hard to get right. I'd claim that they are almost impossible, unless you limit them somehow (shared writable mappings are the nastiest part - if you don't have those, you can reasonably limit your problems by limiting the number of dirty pages you accept through normal "write()" calls)." Instead of attempting the impossible, I've just waited for the dirty page accounting infrastructure to materialize (thanks to Peter Zijlstra and others). This nicely solved the biggest problem: limiting the number of pages used for write caching. Some small details remained, however, which this largish patch attempts to address. It provides a page writeback implementation for fuse, which is completely safe against VM related deadlocks. Performance may not be very good for certain usage patterns, but generally it should be acceptable. It has been tested extensively with fsx-linux and bash-shared-mapping. Fuse page writeback design -------------------------- fuse_writepage() allocates a new temporary page with GFP_NOFS|__GFP_HIGHMEM. It copies the contents of the original page, and queues a WRITE request to the userspace filesystem using this temp page. The writeback is finished instantly from the MM's point of view: the page is removed from the radix trees, and the PageDirty and PageWriteback flags are cleared. For the duration of the actual write, the NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP counter is incremented. The per-bdi writeback count is not decremented until the actual write completes. On dirtying the page, fuse waits for a previous write to finish before proceeding. This makes sure, there can only be one temporary page used at a time for one cached page. This approach is wasteful in both memory and CPU bandwidth, so why is this complication needed? The basic problem is that there can be no guarantee about the time in which the userspace filesystem will complete a write. It may be buggy or even malicious, and fail to complete WRITE requests. We don't want unrelated parts of the system to grind to a halt in such cases. Also a filesystem may need additional resources (particularly memory) to complete a WRITE request. There's a great danger of a deadlock if that allocation may wait for the writepage to finish. Currently there are several cases where the kernel can block on page writeback: - allocation order is larger than PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER - page migration - throttle_vm_writeout (through NR_WRITEBACK) - sync(2) Of course in some cases (fsync, msync) we explicitly want to allow blocking. So for these cases new code has to be added to fuse, since the VM is not tracking writeback pages for us any more. As an extra safetly measure, the maximum dirty ratio allocated to a single fuse filesystem is set to 1% by default. This way one (or several) buggy or malicious fuse filesystems cannot slow down the rest of the system by hogging dirty memory. With appropriate privileges, this limit can be raised through '/sys/class/bdi/<bdi>/max_ratio'. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-30 00:54:41 -07:00
fuse: support writable mmap Quoting Linus (3 years ago, FUSE inclusion discussions): "User-space filesystems are hard to get right. I'd claim that they are almost impossible, unless you limit them somehow (shared writable mappings are the nastiest part - if you don't have those, you can reasonably limit your problems by limiting the number of dirty pages you accept through normal "write()" calls)." Instead of attempting the impossible, I've just waited for the dirty page accounting infrastructure to materialize (thanks to Peter Zijlstra and others). This nicely solved the biggest problem: limiting the number of pages used for write caching. Some small details remained, however, which this largish patch attempts to address. It provides a page writeback implementation for fuse, which is completely safe against VM related deadlocks. Performance may not be very good for certain usage patterns, but generally it should be acceptable. It has been tested extensively with fsx-linux and bash-shared-mapping. Fuse page writeback design -------------------------- fuse_writepage() allocates a new temporary page with GFP_NOFS|__GFP_HIGHMEM. It copies the contents of the original page, and queues a WRITE request to the userspace filesystem using this temp page. The writeback is finished instantly from the MM's point of view: the page is removed from the radix trees, and the PageDirty and PageWriteback flags are cleared. For the duration of the actual write, the NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP counter is incremented. The per-bdi writeback count is not decremented until the actual write completes. On dirtying the page, fuse waits for a previous write to finish before proceeding. This makes sure, there can only be one temporary page used at a time for one cached page. This approach is wasteful in both memory and CPU bandwidth, so why is this complication needed? The basic problem is that there can be no guarantee about the time in which the userspace filesystem will complete a write. It may be buggy or even malicious, and fail to complete WRITE requests. We don't want unrelated parts of the system to grind to a halt in such cases. Also a filesystem may need additional resources (particularly memory) to complete a WRITE request. There's a great danger of a deadlock if that allocation may wait for the writepage to finish. Currently there are several cases where the kernel can block on page writeback: - allocation order is larger than PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER - page migration - throttle_vm_writeout (through NR_WRITEBACK) - sync(2) Of course in some cases (fsync, msync) we explicitly want to allow blocking. So for these cases new code has to be added to fuse, since the VM is not tracking writeback pages for us any more. As an extra safetly measure, the maximum dirty ratio allocated to a single fuse filesystem is set to 1% by default. This way one (or several) buggy or malicious fuse filesystems cannot slow down the rest of the system by hogging dirty memory. With appropriate privileges, this limit can be raised through '/sys/class/bdi/<bdi>/max_ratio'. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-30 00:54:41 -07:00
fuse: hotfix truncate_pagecache() issue The way how fuse calls truncate_pagecache() from fuse_change_attributes() is completely wrong. Because, w/o i_mutex held, we never sure whether 'oldsize' and 'attr->size' are valid by the time of execution of truncate_pagecache(inode, oldsize, attr->size). In fact, as soon as we released fc->lock in the middle of fuse_change_attributes(), we completely loose control of actions which may happen with given inode until we reach truncate_pagecache. The list of potentially dangerous actions includes mmap-ed reads and writes, ftruncate(2) and write(2) extending file size. The typical outcome of doing truncate_pagecache() with outdated arguments is data corruption from user point of view. This is (in some sense) acceptable in cases when the issue is triggered by a change of the file on the server (i.e. externally wrt fuse operation), but it is absolutely intolerable in scenarios when a single fuse client modifies a file without any external intervention. A real life case I discovered by fsx-linux looked like this: 1. Shrinking ftruncate(2) comes to fuse_do_setattr(). The latter sends FUSE_SETATTR to the server synchronously, but before getting fc->lock ... 2. fuse_dentry_revalidate() is asynchronously called. It sends FUSE_LOOKUP to the server synchronously, then calls fuse_change_attributes(). The latter updates i_size, releases fc->lock, but before comparing oldsize vs attr->size.. 3. fuse_do_setattr() from the first step proceeds by acquiring fc->lock and updating attributes and i_size, but now oldsize is equal to outarg.attr.size because i_size has just been updated (step 2). Hence, fuse_do_setattr() returns w/o calling truncate_pagecache(). 4. As soon as ftruncate(2) completes, the user extends file size by write(2) making a hole in the middle of file, then reads data from the hole either by read(2) or mmap-ed read. The user expects to get zero data from the hole, but gets stale data because truncate_pagecache() is not executed yet. The scenario above illustrates one side of the problem: not truncating the page cache even though we should. Another side corresponds to truncating page cache too late, when the state of inode changed significantly. Theoretically, the following is possible: 1. As in the previous scenario fuse_dentry_revalidate() discovered that i_size changed (due to our own fuse_do_setattr()) and is going to call truncate_pagecache() for some 'new_size' it believes valid right now. But by the time that particular truncate_pagecache() is called ... 2. fuse_do_setattr() returns (either having called truncate_pagecache() or not -- it doesn't matter). 3. The file is extended either by write(2) or ftruncate(2) or fallocate(2). 4. mmap-ed write makes a page in the extended region dirty. The result will be the lost of data user wrote on the fourth step. The patch is a hotfix resolving the issue in a simplistic way: let's skip dangerous i_size update and truncate_pagecache if an operation changing file size is in progress. This simplistic approach looks correct for the cases w/o external changes. And to handle them properly, more sophisticated and intrusive techniques (e.g. NFS-like one) would be required. I'd like to postpone it until the issue is well discussed on the mailing list(s). Changed in v2: - improved patch description to cover both sides of the issue. Signed-off-by: Maxim Patlasov <mpatlasov@parallels.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
2013-08-30 17:06:04 +04:00
fuse: support writable mmap Quoting Linus (3 years ago, FUSE inclusion discussions): "User-space filesystems are hard to get right. I'd claim that they are almost impossible, unless you limit them somehow (shared writable mappings are the nastiest part - if you don't have those, you can reasonably limit your problems by limiting the number of dirty pages you accept through normal "write()" calls)." Instead of attempting the impossible, I've just waited for the dirty page accounting infrastructure to materialize (thanks to Peter Zijlstra and others). This nicely solved the biggest problem: limiting the number of pages used for write caching. Some small details remained, however, which this largish patch attempts to address. It provides a page writeback implementation for fuse, which is completely safe against VM related deadlocks. Performance may not be very good for certain usage patterns, but generally it should be acceptable. It has been tested extensively with fsx-linux and bash-shared-mapping. Fuse page writeback design -------------------------- fuse_writepage() allocates a new temporary page with GFP_NOFS|__GFP_HIGHMEM. It copies the contents of the original page, and queues a WRITE request to the userspace filesystem using this temp page. The writeback is finished instantly from the MM's point of view: the page is removed from the radix trees, and the PageDirty and PageWriteback flags are cleared. For the duration of the actual write, the NR_WRITEBACK_TEMP counter is incremented. The per-bdi writeback count is not decremented until the actual write completes. On dirtying the page, fuse waits for a previous write to finish before proceeding. This makes sure, there can only be one temporary page used at a time for one cached page. This approach is wasteful in both memory and CPU bandwidth, so why is this complication needed? The basic problem is that there can be no guarantee about the time in which the userspace filesystem will complete a write. It may be buggy or even malicious, and fail to complete WRITE requests. We don't want unrelated parts of the system to grind to a halt in such cases. Also a filesystem may need additional resources (particularly memory) to complete a WRITE request. There's a great danger of a deadlock if that allocation may wait for the writepage to finish. Currently there are several cases where the kernel can block on page writeback: - allocation order is larger than PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER - page migration - throttle_vm_writeout (through NR_WRITEBACK) - sync(2) Of course in some cases (fsync, msync) we explicitly want to allow blocking. So for these cases new code has to be added to fuse, since the VM is not tracking writeback pages for us any more. As an extra safetly measure, the maximum dirty ratio allocated to a single fuse filesystem is set to 1% by default. This way one (or several) buggy or malicious fuse filesystems cannot slow down the rest of the system by hogging dirty memory. With appropriate privileges, this limit can be raised through '/sys/class/bdi/<bdi>/max_ratio'. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2008-04-30 00:54:41 -07:00
fuse: check attributes staleness on fuse_iget() Function fuse_direntplus_link() might call fuse_iget() to initialize a new fuse_inode and change its attributes. If fi->attr_version is always initialized with 0, even if the attributes returned by the FUSE_READDIR request is staled, as the new fi->attr_version is 0, fuse_change_attributes will still set the staled attributes to inode. This wrong behaviour may cause file size inconsistency even when there is no changes from server-side. To reproduce the issue, consider the following 2 programs (A and B) are running concurrently, A B ---------------------------------- -------------------------------- { /fusemnt/dir/f is a file path in a fuse mount, the size of f is 0. } readdir(/fusemnt/dir) start //Daemon set size 0 to f direntry fallocate(f, 1024) stat(f) // B see size 1024 echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches readdir(/fusemnt/dir) reply to kernel Kernel set 0 to the I_NEW inode stat(f) // B see size 0 In the above case, only program B is modifying the file size, however, B observes file size changing between the 2 'readonly' stat() calls. To fix this issue, we should make sure readdirplus still follows the rule of attr_version staleness checking even if the fi->attr_version is lost due to inode eviction. To identify this situation, the new fc->evict_ctr is used to record whether the eviction of inodes occurs during the readdirplus request processing. If it does, the result of readdirplus may be inaccurate; otherwise, the result of readdirplus can be trusted. Although this may still lead to incorrect invalidation, considering the relatively low frequency of evict occurrences, it should be acceptable. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230711043405.66256-2-zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241114070905.48901-1-zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com/ Reported-by: Jiachen Zhang <zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com> Suggested-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Zhang Tianci <zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-11-18 18:16:00 +08:00
fuse: allow filesystems to have precise control over data cache On networked filesystems file data can be changed externally. FUSE provides notification messages for filesystem to inform kernel that metadata or data region of a file needs to be invalidated in local page cache. That provides the basis for filesystem implementations to invalidate kernel cache explicitly based on observed filesystem-specific events. FUSE has also "automatic" invalidation mode(*) when the kernel automatically invalidates data cache of a file if it sees mtime change. It also automatically invalidates whole data cache of a file if it sees file size being changed. The automatic mode has corresponding capability - FUSE_AUTO_INVAL_DATA. However, due to probably historical reason, that capability controls only whether mtime change should be resulting in automatic invalidation or not. A change in file size always results in invalidating whole data cache of a file irregardless of whether FUSE_AUTO_INVAL_DATA was negotiated(+). The filesystem I write[1] represents data arrays stored in networked database as local files suitable for mmap. It is read-only filesystem - changes to data are committed externally via database interfaces and the filesystem only glues data into contiguous file streams suitable for mmap and traditional array processing. The files are big - starting from hundreds gigabytes and more. The files change regularly, and frequently by data being appended to their end. The size of files thus changes frequently. If a file was accessed locally and some part of its data got into page cache, we want that data to stay cached unless there is memory pressure, or unless corresponding part of the file was actually changed. However current FUSE behaviour - when it sees file size change - is to invalidate the whole file. The data cache of the file is thus completely lost even on small size change, and despite that the filesystem server is careful to accurately translate database changes into FUSE invalidation messages to kernel. Let's fix it: if a filesystem, through new FUSE_EXPLICIT_INVAL_DATA capability, indicates to kernel that it is fully responsible for data cache invalidation, then the kernel won't invalidate files data cache on size change and only truncate that cache to new size in case the size decreased. (*) see 72d0d248ca "fuse: add FUSE_AUTO_INVAL_DATA init flag", eed2179efe "fuse: invalidate inode mapping if mtime changes" (+) in writeback mode the kernel does not invalidate data cache on file size change, but neither it allows the filesystem to set the size due to external event (see 8373200b12 "fuse: Trust kernel i_size only") [1] https://lab.nexedi.com/kirr/wendelin.core/blob/a50f1d9f/wcfs/wcfs.go#L20 Signed-off-by: Kirill Smelkov <kirr@nexedi.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-03-27 11:14:15 +00:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fuse: check attributes staleness on fuse_iget() Function fuse_direntplus_link() might call fuse_iget() to initialize a new fuse_inode and change its attributes. If fi->attr_version is always initialized with 0, even if the attributes returned by the FUSE_READDIR request is staled, as the new fi->attr_version is 0, fuse_change_attributes will still set the staled attributes to inode. This wrong behaviour may cause file size inconsistency even when there is no changes from server-side. To reproduce the issue, consider the following 2 programs (A and B) are running concurrently, A B ---------------------------------- -------------------------------- { /fusemnt/dir/f is a file path in a fuse mount, the size of f is 0. } readdir(/fusemnt/dir) start //Daemon set size 0 to f direntry fallocate(f, 1024) stat(f) // B see size 1024 echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches readdir(/fusemnt/dir) reply to kernel Kernel set 0 to the I_NEW inode stat(f) // B see size 0 In the above case, only program B is modifying the file size, however, B observes file size changing between the 2 'readonly' stat() calls. To fix this issue, we should make sure readdirplus still follows the rule of attr_version staleness checking even if the fi->attr_version is lost due to inode eviction. To identify this situation, the new fc->evict_ctr is used to record whether the eviction of inodes occurs during the readdirplus request processing. If it does, the result of readdirplus may be inaccurate; otherwise, the result of readdirplus can be trusted. Although this may still lead to incorrect invalidation, considering the relatively low frequency of evict occurrences, it should be acceptable. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230711043405.66256-2-zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241114070905.48901-1-zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com/ Reported-by: Jiachen Zhang <zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com> Suggested-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Zhang Tianci <zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-11-18 18:16:00 +08:00
fuse: fixes after adapting to new posix acl api This cycle we ported all filesystems to the new posix acl api. While looking at further simplifications in this area to remove the last remnants of the generic dummy posix acl handlers we realized that we regressed fuse daemons that don't set FUSE_POSIX_ACL but still make use of posix acls. With the change to a dedicated posix acl api interacting with posix acls doesn't go through the old xattr codepaths anymore and instead only relies the get acl and set acl inode operations. Before this change fuse daemons that don't set FUSE_POSIX_ACL were able to get and set posix acl albeit with two caveats. First, that posix acls aren't cached. And second, that they aren't used for permission checking in the vfs. We regressed that use-case as we currently refuse to retrieve any posix acls if they aren't enabled via FUSE_POSIX_ACL. So older fuse daemons would see a change in behavior. We can restore the old behavior in multiple ways. We could change the new posix acl api and look for a dedicated xattr handler and if we find one prefer that over the dedicated posix acl api. That would break the consistency of the new posix acl api so we would very much prefer not to do that. We could introduce a new ACL_*_CACHE sentinel that would instruct the vfs permission checking codepath to not call into the filesystem and ignore acls. But a more straightforward fix for v6.2 is to do the same thing that Overlayfs does and give fuse a separate get acl method for permission checking. Overlayfs uses this to express different needs for vfs permission lookup and acl based retrieval via the regular system call path as well. Let fuse do the same for now. This way fuse can continue to refuse to retrieve posix acls for daemons that don't set FUSE_POSXI_ACL for permission checking while allowing a fuse server to retrieve it via the usual system calls. In the future, we could extend the get acl inode operation to not just pass a simple boolean to indicate rcu lookup but instead make it a flag argument. Then in addition to passing the information that this is an rcu lookup to the filesystem we could also introduce a flag that tells the filesystem that this is a request from the vfs to use these acls for permission checking. Then fuse could refuse the get acl request for permission checking when the daemon doesn't have FUSE_POSIX_ACL set in the same get acl method. This would also help Overlayfs and allow us to remove the second method for it as well. But since that change is more invasive as we need to update the get acl inode operation for multiple filesystems we should not do this as a fix for v6.2. Instead we will do this for the v6.3 merge window. Fwiw, since posix acls are now always correctly translated in the new posix acl api we could also allow them to be used for daemons without FUSE_POSIX_ACL that are not mounted on the host. But this is behavioral change and again if dones should be done for v6.3. For now, let's just restore the original behavior. A nice side-effect of this change is that for fuse daemons with and without FUSE_POSIX_ACL the same code is used for posix acls in a backwards compatible way. This also means we can remove the legacy xattr handlers completely. We've also added comments to explain the expected behavior for daemons without FUSE_POSIX_ACL into the code. Fixes: 318e66856dde ("xattr: use posix acl api") Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee (Digital Ocean) <sforshee@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner (Microsoft) <brauner@kernel.org>
2023-01-20 12:55:04 +01:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fuse: fixes after adapting to new posix acl api This cycle we ported all filesystems to the new posix acl api. While looking at further simplifications in this area to remove the last remnants of the generic dummy posix acl handlers we realized that we regressed fuse daemons that don't set FUSE_POSIX_ACL but still make use of posix acls. With the change to a dedicated posix acl api interacting with posix acls doesn't go through the old xattr codepaths anymore and instead only relies the get acl and set acl inode operations. Before this change fuse daemons that don't set FUSE_POSIX_ACL were able to get and set posix acl albeit with two caveats. First, that posix acls aren't cached. And second, that they aren't used for permission checking in the vfs. We regressed that use-case as we currently refuse to retrieve any posix acls if they aren't enabled via FUSE_POSIX_ACL. So older fuse daemons would see a change in behavior. We can restore the old behavior in multiple ways. We could change the new posix acl api and look for a dedicated xattr handler and if we find one prefer that over the dedicated posix acl api. That would break the consistency of the new posix acl api so we would very much prefer not to do that. We could introduce a new ACL_*_CACHE sentinel that would instruct the vfs permission checking codepath to not call into the filesystem and ignore acls. But a more straightforward fix for v6.2 is to do the same thing that Overlayfs does and give fuse a separate get acl method for permission checking. Overlayfs uses this to express different needs for vfs permission lookup and acl based retrieval via the regular system call path as well. Let fuse do the same for now. This way fuse can continue to refuse to retrieve posix acls for daemons that don't set FUSE_POSXI_ACL for permission checking while allowing a fuse server to retrieve it via the usual system calls. In the future, we could extend the get acl inode operation to not just pass a simple boolean to indicate rcu lookup but instead make it a flag argument. Then in addition to passing the information that this is an rcu lookup to the filesystem we could also introduce a flag that tells the filesystem that this is a request from the vfs to use these acls for permission checking. Then fuse could refuse the get acl request for permission checking when the daemon doesn't have FUSE_POSIX_ACL set in the same get acl method. This would also help Overlayfs and allow us to remove the second method for it as well. But since that change is more invasive as we need to update the get acl inode operation for multiple filesystems we should not do this as a fix for v6.2. Instead we will do this for the v6.3 merge window. Fwiw, since posix acls are now always correctly translated in the new posix acl api we could also allow them to be used for daemons without FUSE_POSIX_ACL that are not mounted on the host. But this is behavioral change and again if dones should be done for v6.3. For now, let's just restore the original behavior. A nice side-effect of this change is that for fuse daemons with and without FUSE_POSIX_ACL the same code is used for posix acls in a backwards compatible way. This also means we can remove the legacy xattr handlers completely. We've also added comments to explain the expected behavior for daemons without FUSE_POSIX_ACL into the code. Fixes: 318e66856dde ("xattr: use posix acl api") Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee (Digital Ocean) <sforshee@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner (Microsoft) <brauner@kernel.org>
2023-01-20 12:55:04 +01:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fuse: check attributes staleness on fuse_iget() Function fuse_direntplus_link() might call fuse_iget() to initialize a new fuse_inode and change its attributes. If fi->attr_version is always initialized with 0, even if the attributes returned by the FUSE_READDIR request is staled, as the new fi->attr_version is 0, fuse_change_attributes will still set the staled attributes to inode. This wrong behaviour may cause file size inconsistency even when there is no changes from server-side. To reproduce the issue, consider the following 2 programs (A and B) are running concurrently, A B ---------------------------------- -------------------------------- { /fusemnt/dir/f is a file path in a fuse mount, the size of f is 0. } readdir(/fusemnt/dir) start //Daemon set size 0 to f direntry fallocate(f, 1024) stat(f) // B see size 1024 echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches readdir(/fusemnt/dir) reply to kernel Kernel set 0 to the I_NEW inode stat(f) // B see size 0 In the above case, only program B is modifying the file size, however, B observes file size changing between the 2 'readonly' stat() calls. To fix this issue, we should make sure readdirplus still follows the rule of attr_version staleness checking even if the fi->attr_version is lost due to inode eviction. To identify this situation, the new fc->evict_ctr is used to record whether the eviction of inodes occurs during the readdirplus request processing. If it does, the result of readdirplus may be inaccurate; otherwise, the result of readdirplus can be trusted. Although this may still lead to incorrect invalidation, considering the relatively low frequency of evict occurrences, it should be acceptable. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230711043405.66256-2-zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241114070905.48901-1-zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com/ Reported-by: Jiachen Zhang <zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com> Suggested-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Zhang Tianci <zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-11-18 18:16:00 +08:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fuse: fixes after adapting to new posix acl api This cycle we ported all filesystems to the new posix acl api. While looking at further simplifications in this area to remove the last remnants of the generic dummy posix acl handlers we realized that we regressed fuse daemons that don't set FUSE_POSIX_ACL but still make use of posix acls. With the change to a dedicated posix acl api interacting with posix acls doesn't go through the old xattr codepaths anymore and instead only relies the get acl and set acl inode operations. Before this change fuse daemons that don't set FUSE_POSIX_ACL were able to get and set posix acl albeit with two caveats. First, that posix acls aren't cached. And second, that they aren't used for permission checking in the vfs. We regressed that use-case as we currently refuse to retrieve any posix acls if they aren't enabled via FUSE_POSIX_ACL. So older fuse daemons would see a change in behavior. We can restore the old behavior in multiple ways. We could change the new posix acl api and look for a dedicated xattr handler and if we find one prefer that over the dedicated posix acl api. That would break the consistency of the new posix acl api so we would very much prefer not to do that. We could introduce a new ACL_*_CACHE sentinel that would instruct the vfs permission checking codepath to not call into the filesystem and ignore acls. But a more straightforward fix for v6.2 is to do the same thing that Overlayfs does and give fuse a separate get acl method for permission checking. Overlayfs uses this to express different needs for vfs permission lookup and acl based retrieval via the regular system call path as well. Let fuse do the same for now. This way fuse can continue to refuse to retrieve posix acls for daemons that don't set FUSE_POSXI_ACL for permission checking while allowing a fuse server to retrieve it via the usual system calls. In the future, we could extend the get acl inode operation to not just pass a simple boolean to indicate rcu lookup but instead make it a flag argument. Then in addition to passing the information that this is an rcu lookup to the filesystem we could also introduce a flag that tells the filesystem that this is a request from the vfs to use these acls for permission checking. Then fuse could refuse the get acl request for permission checking when the daemon doesn't have FUSE_POSIX_ACL set in the same get acl method. This would also help Overlayfs and allow us to remove the second method for it as well. But since that change is more invasive as we need to update the get acl inode operation for multiple filesystems we should not do this as a fix for v6.2. Instead we will do this for the v6.3 merge window. Fwiw, since posix acls are now always correctly translated in the new posix acl api we could also allow them to be used for daemons without FUSE_POSIX_ACL that are not mounted on the host. But this is behavioral change and again if dones should be done for v6.3. For now, let's just restore the original behavior. A nice side-effect of this change is that for fuse daemons with and without FUSE_POSIX_ACL the same code is used for posix acls in a backwards compatible way. This also means we can remove the legacy xattr handlers completely. We've also added comments to explain the expected behavior for daemons without FUSE_POSIX_ACL into the code. Fixes: 318e66856dde ("xattr: use posix acl api") Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee (Digital Ocean) <sforshee@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner (Microsoft) <brauner@kernel.org>
2023-01-20 12:55:04 +01:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fuse: fixes after adapting to new posix acl api This cycle we ported all filesystems to the new posix acl api. While looking at further simplifications in this area to remove the last remnants of the generic dummy posix acl handlers we realized that we regressed fuse daemons that don't set FUSE_POSIX_ACL but still make use of posix acls. With the change to a dedicated posix acl api interacting with posix acls doesn't go through the old xattr codepaths anymore and instead only relies the get acl and set acl inode operations. Before this change fuse daemons that don't set FUSE_POSIX_ACL were able to get and set posix acl albeit with two caveats. First, that posix acls aren't cached. And second, that they aren't used for permission checking in the vfs. We regressed that use-case as we currently refuse to retrieve any posix acls if they aren't enabled via FUSE_POSIX_ACL. So older fuse daemons would see a change in behavior. We can restore the old behavior in multiple ways. We could change the new posix acl api and look for a dedicated xattr handler and if we find one prefer that over the dedicated posix acl api. That would break the consistency of the new posix acl api so we would very much prefer not to do that. We could introduce a new ACL_*_CACHE sentinel that would instruct the vfs permission checking codepath to not call into the filesystem and ignore acls. But a more straightforward fix for v6.2 is to do the same thing that Overlayfs does and give fuse a separate get acl method for permission checking. Overlayfs uses this to express different needs for vfs permission lookup and acl based retrieval via the regular system call path as well. Let fuse do the same for now. This way fuse can continue to refuse to retrieve posix acls for daemons that don't set FUSE_POSXI_ACL for permission checking while allowing a fuse server to retrieve it via the usual system calls. In the future, we could extend the get acl inode operation to not just pass a simple boolean to indicate rcu lookup but instead make it a flag argument. Then in addition to passing the information that this is an rcu lookup to the filesystem we could also introduce a flag that tells the filesystem that this is a request from the vfs to use these acls for permission checking. Then fuse could refuse the get acl request for permission checking when the daemon doesn't have FUSE_POSIX_ACL set in the same get acl method. This would also help Overlayfs and allow us to remove the second method for it as well. But since that change is more invasive as we need to update the get acl inode operation for multiple filesystems we should not do this as a fix for v6.2. Instead we will do this for the v6.3 merge window. Fwiw, since posix acls are now always correctly translated in the new posix acl api we could also allow them to be used for daemons without FUSE_POSIX_ACL that are not mounted on the host. But this is behavioral change and again if dones should be done for v6.3. For now, let's just restore the original behavior. A nice side-effect of this change is that for fuse daemons with and without FUSE_POSIX_ACL the same code is used for posix acls in a backwards compatible way. This also means we can remove the legacy xattr handlers completely. We've also added comments to explain the expected behavior for daemons without FUSE_POSIX_ACL into the code. Fixes: 318e66856dde ("xattr: use posix acl api") Signed-off-by: Seth Forshee (Digital Ocean) <sforshee@kernel.org> Reviewed-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner (Microsoft) <brauner@kernel.org>
2023-01-20 12:55:04 +01:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fuse: check attributes staleness on fuse_iget() Function fuse_direntplus_link() might call fuse_iget() to initialize a new fuse_inode and change its attributes. If fi->attr_version is always initialized with 0, even if the attributes returned by the FUSE_READDIR request is staled, as the new fi->attr_version is 0, fuse_change_attributes will still set the staled attributes to inode. This wrong behaviour may cause file size inconsistency even when there is no changes from server-side. To reproduce the issue, consider the following 2 programs (A and B) are running concurrently, A B ---------------------------------- -------------------------------- { /fusemnt/dir/f is a file path in a fuse mount, the size of f is 0. } readdir(/fusemnt/dir) start //Daemon set size 0 to f direntry fallocate(f, 1024) stat(f) // B see size 1024 echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches readdir(/fusemnt/dir) reply to kernel Kernel set 0 to the I_NEW inode stat(f) // B see size 0 In the above case, only program B is modifying the file size, however, B observes file size changing between the 2 'readonly' stat() calls. To fix this issue, we should make sure readdirplus still follows the rule of attr_version staleness checking even if the fi->attr_version is lost due to inode eviction. To identify this situation, the new fc->evict_ctr is used to record whether the eviction of inodes occurs during the readdirplus request processing. If it does, the result of readdirplus may be inaccurate; otherwise, the result of readdirplus can be trusted. Although this may still lead to incorrect invalidation, considering the relatively low frequency of evict occurrences, it should be acceptable. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230711043405.66256-2-zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241114070905.48901-1-zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com/ Reported-by: Jiachen Zhang <zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com> Suggested-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Zhang Tianci <zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-11-18 18:16:00 +08:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
mm, fs: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and page_cache_{get,release} macros PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time ago with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page cache with bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE. This promise never materialized. And unlikely will. We have many places where PAGE_CACHE_SIZE assumed to be equal to PAGE_SIZE. And it's constant source of confusion on whether PAGE_CACHE_* or PAGE_* constant should be used in a particular case, especially on the border between fs and mm. Global switching to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE would cause to much breakage to be doable. Let's stop pretending that pages in page cache are special. They are not. The changes are pretty straight-forward: - <foo> << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - <foo> >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} -> PAGE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN}; - page_cache_get() -> get_page(); - page_cache_release() -> put_page(); This patch contains automated changes generated with coccinelle using script below. For some reason, coccinelle doesn't patch header files. I've called spatch for them manually. The only adjustment after coccinelle is revert of changes to PAGE_CAHCE_ALIGN definition: we are going to drop it later. There are few places in the code where coccinelle didn't reach. I'll fix them manually in a separate patch. Comments and documentation also will be addressed with the separate patch. virtual patch @@ expression E; @@ - E << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ expression E; @@ - E >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT + PAGE_SHIFT @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SIZE + PAGE_SIZE @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_MASK + PAGE_MASK @@ expression E; @@ - PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(E) + PAGE_ALIGN(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_get(E) + get_page(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_release(E) + put_page(E) Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-04-01 15:29:47 +03:00
mm, fs: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and page_cache_{get,release} macros PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time ago with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page cache with bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE. This promise never materialized. And unlikely will. We have many places where PAGE_CACHE_SIZE assumed to be equal to PAGE_SIZE. And it's constant source of confusion on whether PAGE_CACHE_* or PAGE_* constant should be used in a particular case, especially on the border between fs and mm. Global switching to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE would cause to much breakage to be doable. Let's stop pretending that pages in page cache are special. They are not. The changes are pretty straight-forward: - <foo> << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - <foo> >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} -> PAGE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN}; - page_cache_get() -> get_page(); - page_cache_release() -> put_page(); This patch contains automated changes generated with coccinelle using script below. For some reason, coccinelle doesn't patch header files. I've called spatch for them manually. The only adjustment after coccinelle is revert of changes to PAGE_CAHCE_ALIGN definition: we are going to drop it later. There are few places in the code where coccinelle didn't reach. I'll fix them manually in a separate patch. Comments and documentation also will be addressed with the separate patch. virtual patch @@ expression E; @@ - E << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ expression E; @@ - E >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT + PAGE_SHIFT @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SIZE + PAGE_SIZE @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_MASK + PAGE_MASK @@ expression E; @@ - PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(E) + PAGE_ALIGN(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_get(E) + get_page(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_release(E) + put_page(E) Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-04-01 15:29:47 +03:00
virtiofs: propagate sync() to file server Even if POSIX doesn't mandate it, linux users legitimately expect sync() to flush all data and metadata to physical storage when it is located on the same system. This isn't happening with virtiofs though: sync() inside the guest returns right away even though data still needs to be flushed from the host page cache. This is easily demonstrated by doing the following in the guest: $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/foo bs=1M count=5K ; strace -T -e sync sync 5120+0 records in 5120+0 records out 5368709120 bytes (5.4 GB, 5.0 GiB) copied, 5.22224 s, 1.0 GB/s sync() = 0 <0.024068> and start the following in the host when the 'dd' command completes in the guest: $ strace -T -e fsync /usr/bin/sync virtiofs/foo fsync(3) = 0 <10.371640> There are no good reasons not to honor the expected behavior of sync() actually: it gives an unrealistic impression that virtiofs is super fast and that data has safely landed on HW, which isn't the case obviously. Implement a ->sync_fs() superblock operation that sends a new FUSE_SYNCFS request type for this purpose. Provision a 64-bit placeholder for possible future extensions. Since the file server cannot handle the wait == 0 case, we skip it to avoid a gratuitous roundtrip. Note that this is per-superblock: a FUSE_SYNCFS is send for the root mount and for each submount. Like with FUSE_FSYNC and FUSE_FSYNCDIR, lack of support for FUSE_SYNCFS in the file server is treated as permanent success. This ensures compatibility with older file servers: the client will get the current behavior of sync() not being propagated to the file server. Note that such an operation allows the file server to DoS sync(). Since a typical FUSE file server is an untrusted piece of software running in userspace, this is disabled by default. Only enable it with virtiofs for now since virtiofsd is supposedly trusted by the guest kernel. Reported-by: Robert Krawitz <rlk@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2021-05-20 17:46:54 +02:00
virtiofs: propagate sync() to file server Even if POSIX doesn't mandate it, linux users legitimately expect sync() to flush all data and metadata to physical storage when it is located on the same system. This isn't happening with virtiofs though: sync() inside the guest returns right away even though data still needs to be flushed from the host page cache. This is easily demonstrated by doing the following in the guest: $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/foo bs=1M count=5K ; strace -T -e sync sync 5120+0 records in 5120+0 records out 5368709120 bytes (5.4 GB, 5.0 GiB) copied, 5.22224 s, 1.0 GB/s sync() = 0 <0.024068> and start the following in the host when the 'dd' command completes in the guest: $ strace -T -e fsync /usr/bin/sync virtiofs/foo fsync(3) = 0 <10.371640> There are no good reasons not to honor the expected behavior of sync() actually: it gives an unrealistic impression that virtiofs is super fast and that data has safely landed on HW, which isn't the case obviously. Implement a ->sync_fs() superblock operation that sends a new FUSE_SYNCFS request type for this purpose. Provision a 64-bit placeholder for possible future extensions. Since the file server cannot handle the wait == 0 case, we skip it to avoid a gratuitous roundtrip. Note that this is per-superblock: a FUSE_SYNCFS is send for the root mount and for each submount. Like with FUSE_FSYNC and FUSE_FSYNCDIR, lack of support for FUSE_SYNCFS in the file server is treated as permanent success. This ensures compatibility with older file servers: the client will get the current behavior of sync() not being propagated to the file server. Note that such an operation allows the file server to DoS sync(). Since a typical FUSE file server is an untrusted piece of software running in userspace, this is disabled by default. Only enable it with virtiofs for now since virtiofsd is supposedly trusted by the guest kernel. Reported-by: Robert Krawitz <rlk@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2021-05-20 17:46:54 +02:00
virtiofs: propagate sync() to file server Even if POSIX doesn't mandate it, linux users legitimately expect sync() to flush all data and metadata to physical storage when it is located on the same system. This isn't happening with virtiofs though: sync() inside the guest returns right away even though data still needs to be flushed from the host page cache. This is easily demonstrated by doing the following in the guest: $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/foo bs=1M count=5K ; strace -T -e sync sync 5120+0 records in 5120+0 records out 5368709120 bytes (5.4 GB, 5.0 GiB) copied, 5.22224 s, 1.0 GB/s sync() = 0 <0.024068> and start the following in the host when the 'dd' command completes in the guest: $ strace -T -e fsync /usr/bin/sync virtiofs/foo fsync(3) = 0 <10.371640> There are no good reasons not to honor the expected behavior of sync() actually: it gives an unrealistic impression that virtiofs is super fast and that data has safely landed on HW, which isn't the case obviously. Implement a ->sync_fs() superblock operation that sends a new FUSE_SYNCFS request type for this purpose. Provision a 64-bit placeholder for possible future extensions. Since the file server cannot handle the wait == 0 case, we skip it to avoid a gratuitous roundtrip. Note that this is per-superblock: a FUSE_SYNCFS is send for the root mount and for each submount. Like with FUSE_FSYNC and FUSE_FSYNCDIR, lack of support for FUSE_SYNCFS in the file server is treated as permanent success. This ensures compatibility with older file servers: the client will get the current behavior of sync() not being propagated to the file server. Note that such an operation allows the file server to DoS sync(). Since a typical FUSE file server is an untrusted piece of software running in userspace, this is disabled by default. Only enable it with virtiofs for now since virtiofsd is supposedly trusted by the guest kernel. Reported-by: Robert Krawitz <rlk@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2021-05-20 17:46:54 +02:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fuse: check attributes staleness on fuse_iget() Function fuse_direntplus_link() might call fuse_iget() to initialize a new fuse_inode and change its attributes. If fi->attr_version is always initialized with 0, even if the attributes returned by the FUSE_READDIR request is staled, as the new fi->attr_version is 0, fuse_change_attributes will still set the staled attributes to inode. This wrong behaviour may cause file size inconsistency even when there is no changes from server-side. To reproduce the issue, consider the following 2 programs (A and B) are running concurrently, A B ---------------------------------- -------------------------------- { /fusemnt/dir/f is a file path in a fuse mount, the size of f is 0. } readdir(/fusemnt/dir) start //Daemon set size 0 to f direntry fallocate(f, 1024) stat(f) // B see size 1024 echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches readdir(/fusemnt/dir) reply to kernel Kernel set 0 to the I_NEW inode stat(f) // B see size 0 In the above case, only program B is modifying the file size, however, B observes file size changing between the 2 'readonly' stat() calls. To fix this issue, we should make sure readdirplus still follows the rule of attr_version staleness checking even if the fi->attr_version is lost due to inode eviction. To identify this situation, the new fc->evict_ctr is used to record whether the eviction of inodes occurs during the readdirplus request processing. If it does, the result of readdirplus may be inaccurate; otherwise, the result of readdirplus can be trusted. Although this may still lead to incorrect invalidation, considering the relatively low frequency of evict occurrences, it should be acceptable. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230711043405.66256-2-zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241114070905.48901-1-zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com/ Reported-by: Jiachen Zhang <zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com> Suggested-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Zhang Tianci <zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-11-18 18:16:00 +08:00
fuse: Support fuse filesystems outside of init_user_ns In order to support mounts from namespaces other than init_user_ns, fuse must translate uids and gids to/from the userns of the process servicing requests on /dev/fuse. This patch does that, with a couple of restrictions on the namespace: - The userns for the fuse connection is fixed to the namespace from which /dev/fuse is opened. - The namespace must be the same as s_user_ns. These restrictions simplify the implementation by avoiding the need to pass around userns references and by allowing fuse to rely on the checks in setattr_prepare for ownership changes. Either restriction could be relaxed in the future if needed. For cuse the userns used is the opener of /dev/cuse. Semantically the cuse support does not appear safe for unprivileged users. Practically the permissions on /dev/cuse only make it accessible to the global root user. If something slips through the cracks in a user namespace the only users who will be able to use the cuse device are those users mapped into the user namespace. Translation in the posix acl is updated to use the uuser namespace of the filesystem. Avoiding cases which might bypass this translation is handled in a following change. This change is stronlgy based on a similar change from Seth Forshee and Dongsu Park. Cc: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com> Cc: Dongsu Park <dongsu@kinvolk.io> Signed-off-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2018-02-21 11:18:07 -06:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
virtio-fs: add virtiofs filesystem Add a basic file system module for virtio-fs. This does not yet contain shared data support between host and guest or metadata coherency speedups. However it is already significantly faster than virtio-9p. Design Overview =============== With the goal of designing something with better performance and local file system semantics, a bunch of ideas were proposed. - Use fuse protocol (instead of 9p) for communication between guest and host. Guest kernel will be fuse client and a fuse server will run on host to serve the requests. - For data access inside guest, mmap portion of file in QEMU address space and guest accesses this memory using dax. That way guest page cache is bypassed and there is only one copy of data (on host). This will also enable mmap(MAP_SHARED) between guests. - For metadata coherency, there is a shared memory region which contains version number associated with metadata and any guest changing metadata updates version number and other guests refresh metadata on next access. This is yet to be implemented. How virtio-fs differs from existing approaches ============================================== The unique idea behind virtio-fs is to take advantage of the co-location of the virtual machine and hypervisor to avoid communication (vmexits). DAX allows file contents to be accessed without communication with the hypervisor. The shared memory region for metadata avoids communication in the common case where metadata is unchanged. By replacing expensive communication with cheaper shared memory accesses, we expect to achieve better performance than approaches based on network file system protocols. In addition, this also makes it easier to achieve local file system semantics (coherency). These techniques are not applicable to network file system protocols since the communications channel is bypassed by taking advantage of shared memory on a local machine. This is why we decided to build virtio-fs rather than focus on 9P or NFS. Caching Modes ============= Like virtio-9p, different caching modes are supported which determine the coherency level as well. The “cache=FOO” and “writeback” options control the level of coherence between the guest and host filesystems. - cache=none metadata, data and pathname lookup are not cached in guest. They are always fetched from host and any changes are immediately pushed to host. - cache=always metadata, data and pathname lookup are cached in guest and never expire. - cache=auto metadata and pathname lookup cache expires after a configured amount of time (default is 1 second). Data is cached while the file is open (close to open consistency). - writeback/no_writeback These options control the writeback strategy. If writeback is disabled, then normal writes will immediately be synchronized with the host fs. If writeback is enabled, then writes may be cached in the guest until the file is closed or an fsync(2) performed. This option has no effect on mmap-ed writes or writes going through the DAX mechanism. Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2018-06-12 09:41:17 +01:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fuse: check attributes staleness on fuse_iget() Function fuse_direntplus_link() might call fuse_iget() to initialize a new fuse_inode and change its attributes. If fi->attr_version is always initialized with 0, even if the attributes returned by the FUSE_READDIR request is staled, as the new fi->attr_version is 0, fuse_change_attributes will still set the staled attributes to inode. This wrong behaviour may cause file size inconsistency even when there is no changes from server-side. To reproduce the issue, consider the following 2 programs (A and B) are running concurrently, A B ---------------------------------- -------------------------------- { /fusemnt/dir/f is a file path in a fuse mount, the size of f is 0. } readdir(/fusemnt/dir) start //Daemon set size 0 to f direntry fallocate(f, 1024) stat(f) // B see size 1024 echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches readdir(/fusemnt/dir) reply to kernel Kernel set 0 to the I_NEW inode stat(f) // B see size 0 In the above case, only program B is modifying the file size, however, B observes file size changing between the 2 'readonly' stat() calls. To fix this issue, we should make sure readdirplus still follows the rule of attr_version staleness checking even if the fi->attr_version is lost due to inode eviction. To identify this situation, the new fc->evict_ctr is used to record whether the eviction of inodes occurs during the readdirplus request processing. If it does, the result of readdirplus may be inaccurate; otherwise, the result of readdirplus can be trusted. Although this may still lead to incorrect invalidation, considering the relatively low frequency of evict occurrences, it should be acceptable. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230711043405.66256-2-zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241114070905.48901-1-zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com/ Reported-by: Jiachen Zhang <zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com> Suggested-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Zhang Tianci <zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-11-18 18:16:00 +08:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fuse: add support for explicit export disabling open_by_handle_at(2) can fail with -ESTALE with a valid handle returned by a previous name_to_handle_at(2) for evicted fuse inodes, which is especially common when entry_valid_timeout is 0, e.g. when the fuse daemon is in "cache=none" mode. The time sequence is like: name_to_handle_at(2) # succeed evict fuse inode open_by_handle_at(2) # fail The root cause is that, with 0 entry_valid_timeout, the dput() called in name_to_handle_at(2) will trigger iput -> evict(), which will send FUSE_FORGET to the daemon. The following open_by_handle_at(2) will send a new FUSE_LOOKUP request upon inode cache miss since the previous inode eviction. Then the fuse daemon may fail the FUSE_LOOKUP request with -ENOENT as the cached metadata of the requested inode has already been cleaned up during the previous FUSE_FORGET. The returned -ENOENT is treated as -ESTALE when open_by_handle_at(2) returns. This confuses the application somehow, as open_by_handle_at(2) fails when the previous name_to_handle_at(2) succeeds. The returned errno is also confusing as the requested file is not deleted and already there. It is reasonable to fail name_to_handle_at(2) early in this case, after which the application can fallback to open(2) to access files. Since this issue typically appears when entry_valid_timeout is 0 which is configured by the fuse daemon, the fuse daemon is the right person to explicitly disable the export when required. Also considering FUSE_EXPORT_SUPPORT actually indicates the support for lookups of "." and "..", and there are existing fuse daemons supporting export without FUSE_EXPORT_SUPPORT set, for compatibility, we add a new INIT flag for such purpose. Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-02-26 11:54:35 +08:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
virtiofs: propagate sync() to file server Even if POSIX doesn't mandate it, linux users legitimately expect sync() to flush all data and metadata to physical storage when it is located on the same system. This isn't happening with virtiofs though: sync() inside the guest returns right away even though data still needs to be flushed from the host page cache. This is easily demonstrated by doing the following in the guest: $ dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/foo bs=1M count=5K ; strace -T -e sync sync 5120+0 records in 5120+0 records out 5368709120 bytes (5.4 GB, 5.0 GiB) copied, 5.22224 s, 1.0 GB/s sync() = 0 <0.024068> and start the following in the host when the 'dd' command completes in the guest: $ strace -T -e fsync /usr/bin/sync virtiofs/foo fsync(3) = 0 <10.371640> There are no good reasons not to honor the expected behavior of sync() actually: it gives an unrealistic impression that virtiofs is super fast and that data has safely landed on HW, which isn't the case obviously. Implement a ->sync_fs() superblock operation that sends a new FUSE_SYNCFS request type for this purpose. Provision a 64-bit placeholder for possible future extensions. Since the file server cannot handle the wait == 0 case, we skip it to avoid a gratuitous roundtrip. Note that this is per-superblock: a FUSE_SYNCFS is send for the root mount and for each submount. Like with FUSE_FSYNC and FUSE_FSYNCDIR, lack of support for FUSE_SYNCFS in the file server is treated as permanent success. This ensures compatibility with older file servers: the client will get the current behavior of sync() not being propagated to the file server. Note that such an operation allows the file server to DoS sync(). Since a typical FUSE file server is an untrusted piece of software running in userspace, this is disabled by default. Only enable it with virtiofs for now since virtiofsd is supposedly trusted by the guest kernel. Reported-by: Robert Krawitz <rlk@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2021-05-20 17:46:54 +02:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fuse: add default_request_timeout and max_request_timeout sysctls Introduce two new sysctls, "default_request_timeout" and "max_request_timeout". These control how long (in seconds) a server can take to reply to a request. If the server does not reply by the timeout, then the connection will be aborted. The upper bound on these sysctl values is 65535. "default_request_timeout" sets the default timeout if no timeout is specified by the fuse server on mount. 0 (default) indicates no default timeout should be enforced. If the server did specify a timeout, then default_request_timeout will be ignored. "max_request_timeout" sets the max amount of time the server may take to reply to a request. 0 (default) indicates no maximum timeout. If max_request_timeout is set and the fuse server attempts to set a timeout greater than max_request_timeout, the system will use max_request_timeout as the timeout. Similarly, if default_request_timeout is greater than max_request_timeout, the system will use max_request_timeout as the timeout. If the server does not request a timeout and default_request_timeout is set to 0 but max_request_timeout is set, then the timeout will be max_request_timeout. Please note that these timeouts are not 100% precise. The request may take roughly an extra FUSE_TIMEOUT_TIMER_FREQ seconds beyond the set max timeout due to how it's internally implemented. $ sysctl -a | grep fuse.default_request_timeout fs.fuse.default_request_timeout = 0 $ echo 65536 | sudo tee /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout tee: /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout: Invalid argument $ echo 65535 | sudo tee /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout 65535 $ sysctl -a | grep fuse.default_request_timeout fs.fuse.default_request_timeout = 65535 $ echo 0 | sudo tee /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout 0 $ sysctl -a | grep fuse.default_request_timeout fs.fuse.default_request_timeout = 0 [Luis Henriques: Limit the timeout to the range [FUSE_TIMEOUT_TIMER_FREQ, fuse_max_req_timeout]] Signed-off-by: Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Bernd Schubert <bschubert@ddn.com> Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> Reviewed-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org> Reviewed-by: Luis Henriques <luis@igalia.com> Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2025-01-22 13:55:28 -08:00
mm, fs: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and page_cache_{get,release} macros PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time ago with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page cache with bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE. This promise never materialized. And unlikely will. We have many places where PAGE_CACHE_SIZE assumed to be equal to PAGE_SIZE. And it's constant source of confusion on whether PAGE_CACHE_* or PAGE_* constant should be used in a particular case, especially on the border between fs and mm. Global switching to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE would cause to much breakage to be doable. Let's stop pretending that pages in page cache are special. They are not. The changes are pretty straight-forward: - <foo> << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - <foo> >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} -> PAGE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN}; - page_cache_get() -> get_page(); - page_cache_release() -> put_page(); This patch contains automated changes generated with coccinelle using script below. For some reason, coccinelle doesn't patch header files. I've called spatch for them manually. The only adjustment after coccinelle is revert of changes to PAGE_CAHCE_ALIGN definition: we are going to drop it later. There are few places in the code where coccinelle didn't reach. I'll fix them manually in a separate patch. Comments and documentation also will be addressed with the separate patch. virtual patch @@ expression E; @@ - E << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ expression E; @@ - E >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT + PAGE_SHIFT @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SIZE + PAGE_SIZE @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_MASK + PAGE_MASK @@ expression E; @@ - PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(E) + PAGE_ALIGN(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_get(E) + get_page(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_release(E) + put_page(E) Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-04-01 15:29:47 +03:00
fuse: allow filesystems to have precise control over data cache On networked filesystems file data can be changed externally. FUSE provides notification messages for filesystem to inform kernel that metadata or data region of a file needs to be invalidated in local page cache. That provides the basis for filesystem implementations to invalidate kernel cache explicitly based on observed filesystem-specific events. FUSE has also "automatic" invalidation mode(*) when the kernel automatically invalidates data cache of a file if it sees mtime change. It also automatically invalidates whole data cache of a file if it sees file size being changed. The automatic mode has corresponding capability - FUSE_AUTO_INVAL_DATA. However, due to probably historical reason, that capability controls only whether mtime change should be resulting in automatic invalidation or not. A change in file size always results in invalidating whole data cache of a file irregardless of whether FUSE_AUTO_INVAL_DATA was negotiated(+). The filesystem I write[1] represents data arrays stored in networked database as local files suitable for mmap. It is read-only filesystem - changes to data are committed externally via database interfaces and the filesystem only glues data into contiguous file streams suitable for mmap and traditional array processing. The files are big - starting from hundreds gigabytes and more. The files change regularly, and frequently by data being appended to their end. The size of files thus changes frequently. If a file was accessed locally and some part of its data got into page cache, we want that data to stay cached unless there is memory pressure, or unless corresponding part of the file was actually changed. However current FUSE behaviour - when it sees file size change - is to invalidate the whole file. The data cache of the file is thus completely lost even on small size change, and despite that the filesystem server is careful to accurately translate database changes into FUSE invalidation messages to kernel. Let's fix it: if a filesystem, through new FUSE_EXPLICIT_INVAL_DATA capability, indicates to kernel that it is fully responsible for data cache invalidation, then the kernel won't invalidate files data cache on size change and only truncate that cache to new size in case the size decreased. (*) see 72d0d248ca "fuse: add FUSE_AUTO_INVAL_DATA init flag", eed2179efe "fuse: invalidate inode mapping if mtime changes" (+) in writeback mode the kernel does not invalidate data cache on file size change, but neither it allows the filesystem to set the size due to external event (see 8373200b12 "fuse: Trust kernel i_size only") [1] https://lab.nexedi.com/kirr/wendelin.core/blob/a50f1d9f/wcfs/wcfs.go#L20 Signed-off-by: Kirill Smelkov <kirr@nexedi.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2019-03-27 11:14:15 +00:00
fuse: add max_pages to init_out Replace FUSE_MAX_PAGES_PER_REQ with the configurable parameter max_pages to improve performance. Old RFC with detailed description of the problem and many fixes by Mitsuo Hayasaka (mitsuo.hayasaka.hu@hitachi.com): - https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/5/136 We've encountered performance degradation and fixed it on a big and complex virtual environment. Environment to reproduce degradation and improvement: 1. Add lag to user mode FUSE Add nanosleep(&(struct timespec){ 0, 1000 }, NULL); to xmp_write_buf in passthrough_fh.c 2. patch UM fuse with configurable max_pages parameter. The patch will be provided latter. 3. run test script and perform test on tmpfs fuse_test() { cd /tmp mkdir -p fusemnt passthrough_fh -o max_pages=$1 /tmp/fusemnt grep fuse /proc/self/mounts dd conv=fdatasync oflag=dsync if=/dev/zero of=fusemnt/tmp/tmp \ count=1K bs=1M 2>&1 | grep -v records rm fusemnt/tmp/tmp killall passthrough_fh } Test results: passthrough_fh /tmp/fusemnt fuse.passthrough_fh \ rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0 0 0 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 1.73867 s, 618 MB/s passthrough_fh /tmp/fusemnt fuse.passthrough_fh \ rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,max_pages=256 0 0 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 1.15643 s, 928 MB/s Obviously with bigger lag the difference between 'before' and 'after' will be more significant. Mitsuo Hayasaka, in 2012 (https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/5/136), observed improvement from 400-550 to 520-740. Signed-off-by: Constantine Shulyupin <const@MakeLinux.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2018-09-06 15:37:06 +03:00
fuse: add max_pages to init_out Replace FUSE_MAX_PAGES_PER_REQ with the configurable parameter max_pages to improve performance. Old RFC with detailed description of the problem and many fixes by Mitsuo Hayasaka (mitsuo.hayasaka.hu@hitachi.com): - https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/5/136 We've encountered performance degradation and fixed it on a big and complex virtual environment. Environment to reproduce degradation and improvement: 1. Add lag to user mode FUSE Add nanosleep(&(struct timespec){ 0, 1000 }, NULL); to xmp_write_buf in passthrough_fh.c 2. patch UM fuse with configurable max_pages parameter. The patch will be provided latter. 3. run test script and perform test on tmpfs fuse_test() { cd /tmp mkdir -p fusemnt passthrough_fh -o max_pages=$1 /tmp/fusemnt grep fuse /proc/self/mounts dd conv=fdatasync oflag=dsync if=/dev/zero of=fusemnt/tmp/tmp \ count=1K bs=1M 2>&1 | grep -v records rm fusemnt/tmp/tmp killall passthrough_fh } Test results: passthrough_fh /tmp/fusemnt fuse.passthrough_fh \ rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0 0 0 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 1.73867 s, 618 MB/s passthrough_fh /tmp/fusemnt fuse.passthrough_fh \ rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,max_pages=256 0 0 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 1.15643 s, 928 MB/s Obviously with bigger lag the difference between 'before' and 'after' will be more significant. Mitsuo Hayasaka, in 2012 (https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/5/136), observed improvement from 400-550 to 520-740. Signed-off-by: Constantine Shulyupin <const@MakeLinux.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2018-09-06 15:37:06 +03:00
fuse: add max_pages to init_out Replace FUSE_MAX_PAGES_PER_REQ with the configurable parameter max_pages to improve performance. Old RFC with detailed description of the problem and many fixes by Mitsuo Hayasaka (mitsuo.hayasaka.hu@hitachi.com): - https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/5/136 We've encountered performance degradation and fixed it on a big and complex virtual environment. Environment to reproduce degradation and improvement: 1. Add lag to user mode FUSE Add nanosleep(&(struct timespec){ 0, 1000 }, NULL); to xmp_write_buf in passthrough_fh.c 2. patch UM fuse with configurable max_pages parameter. The patch will be provided latter. 3. run test script and perform test on tmpfs fuse_test() { cd /tmp mkdir -p fusemnt passthrough_fh -o max_pages=$1 /tmp/fusemnt grep fuse /proc/self/mounts dd conv=fdatasync oflag=dsync if=/dev/zero of=fusemnt/tmp/tmp \ count=1K bs=1M 2>&1 | grep -v records rm fusemnt/tmp/tmp killall passthrough_fh } Test results: passthrough_fh /tmp/fusemnt fuse.passthrough_fh \ rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0 0 0 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 1.73867 s, 618 MB/s passthrough_fh /tmp/fusemnt fuse.passthrough_fh \ rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,user_id=0,group_id=0,max_pages=256 0 0 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 1.15643 s, 928 MB/s Obviously with bigger lag the difference between 'before' and 'after' will be more significant. Mitsuo Hayasaka, in 2012 (https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/5/136), observed improvement from 400-550 to 520-740. Signed-off-by: Constantine Shulyupin <const@MakeLinux.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2018-09-06 15:37:06 +03:00
fuse: support SB_NOSEC flag to improve write performance Virtiofs can be slow with small writes if xattr are enabled and we are doing cached writes (No direct I/O). Ganesh Mahalingam noticed this. Some debugging showed that file_remove_privs() is called in cached write path on every write. And everytime it calls security_inode_need_killpriv() which results in call to __vfs_getxattr(XATTR_NAME_CAPS). And this goes to file server to fetch xattr. This extra round trip for every write slows down writes tremendously. Normally to avoid paying this penalty on every write, vfs has the notion of caching this information in inode (S_NOSEC). So vfs sets S_NOSEC, if filesystem opted for it using super block flag SB_NOSEC. And S_NOSEC is cleared when setuid/setgid bit is set or when security xattr is set on inode so that next time a write happens, we check inode again for clearing setuid/setgid bits as well clear any security.capability xattr. This seems to work well for local file systems but for remote file systems it is possible that VFS does not have full picture and a different client sets setuid/setgid bit or security.capability xattr on file and that means VFS information about S_NOSEC on another client will be stale. So for remote filesystems SB_NOSEC was disabled by default. Commit 9e1f1de02c22 ("more conservative S_NOSEC handling") mentioned that these filesystems can still make use of SB_NOSEC as long as they clear S_NOSEC when they are refreshing inode attriutes from server. So this patch tries to enable SB_NOSEC on fuse (regular fuse as well as virtiofs). And clear SB_NOSEC when we are refreshing inode attributes. This is enabled only if server supports FUSE_HANDLE_KILLPRIV_V2. This says that server will clear setuid/setgid/security.capability on chown/truncate/write as apporpriate. This should provide tighter coherency because now suid/sgid/ security.capability will be cleared even if fuse client cache has not seen these attrs. Basic idea is that fuse client will trigger suid/sgid/security.capability clearing based on its attr cache. But even if cache has gone stale, it is fine because FUSE_HANDLE_KILLPRIV_V2 will make sure WRITE clear suid/sgid/security.capability. We make this change only if server supports FUSE_HANDLE_KILLPRIV_V2. This should make sure that existing filesystems which might be relying on seucurity.capability always being queried from server are not impacted. This tighter coherency relies on WRITE showing up on server (and not being cached in guest). So writeback_cache mode will not provide that tight coherency and it is not recommended to use two together. Having said that it might work reasonably well for lot of use cases. This change improves random write performance very significantly. Running virtiofsd with cache=auto and following fio command: fio --ioengine=libaio --direct=1 --name=test --filename=/mnt/virtiofs/random_read_write.fio --bs=4k --iodepth=64 --size=4G --readwrite=randwrite Bandwidth increases from around 50MB/s to around 250MB/s as a result of applying this patch. So improvement is very significant. Link: https://github.com/kata-containers/runtime/issues/2815 Reported-by: "Mahalingam, Ganesh" <ganesh.mahalingam@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2020-10-09 14:15:12 -04:00
fuse: send security context of inode on file When a new inode is created, send its security context to server along with creation request (FUSE_CREAT, FUSE_MKNOD, FUSE_MKDIR and FUSE_SYMLINK). This gives server an opportunity to create new file and set security context (possibly atomically). In all the configurations it might not be possible to set context atomically. Like nfs and ceph, use security_dentry_init_security() to dermine security context of inode and send it with create, mkdir, mknod, and symlink requests. Following is the information sent to server. fuse_sectx_header, fuse_secctx, xattr_name, security_context - struct fuse_secctx_header This contains total number of security contexts being sent and total size of all the security contexts (including size of fuse_secctx_header). - struct fuse_secctx This contains size of security context which follows this structure. There is one fuse_secctx instance per security context. - xattr name string This string represents name of xattr which should be used while setting security context. - security context This is the actual security context whose size is specified in fuse_secctx struct. Also add the FUSE_SECURITY_CTX flag for the `flags` field of the fuse_init_out struct. When this flag is set the kernel will append the security context for a newly created inode to the request (create, mkdir, mknod, and symlink). The server is responsible for ensuring that the inode appears atomically (preferrably) with the requested security context. For example, If the server is using SELinux and backed by a "real" linux file system that supports extended attributes it can write the security context value to /proc/thread-self/attr/fscreate before making the syscall to create the inode. This patch is based on patch from Chirantan Ekbote <chirantan@chromium.org> Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2021-11-11 09:32:49 -05:00
fuse: add support for explicit export disabling open_by_handle_at(2) can fail with -ESTALE with a valid handle returned by a previous name_to_handle_at(2) for evicted fuse inodes, which is especially common when entry_valid_timeout is 0, e.g. when the fuse daemon is in "cache=none" mode. The time sequence is like: name_to_handle_at(2) # succeed evict fuse inode open_by_handle_at(2) # fail The root cause is that, with 0 entry_valid_timeout, the dput() called in name_to_handle_at(2) will trigger iput -> evict(), which will send FUSE_FORGET to the daemon. The following open_by_handle_at(2) will send a new FUSE_LOOKUP request upon inode cache miss since the previous inode eviction. Then the fuse daemon may fail the FUSE_LOOKUP request with -ENOENT as the cached metadata of the requested inode has already been cleaned up during the previous FUSE_FORGET. The returned -ENOENT is treated as -ESTALE when open_by_handle_at(2) returns. This confuses the application somehow, as open_by_handle_at(2) fails when the previous name_to_handle_at(2) succeeds. The returned errno is also confusing as the requested file is not deleted and already there. It is reasonable to fail name_to_handle_at(2) early in this case, after which the application can fallback to open(2) to access files. Since this issue typically appears when entry_valid_timeout is 0 which is configured by the fuse daemon, the fuse daemon is the right person to explicitly disable the export when required. Also considering FUSE_EXPORT_SUPPORT actually indicates the support for lookups of "." and "..", and there are existing fuse daemons supporting export without FUSE_EXPORT_SUPPORT set, for compatibility, we add a new INIT flag for such purpose. Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-02-26 11:54:35 +08:00
fuse: add default_request_timeout and max_request_timeout sysctls Introduce two new sysctls, "default_request_timeout" and "max_request_timeout". These control how long (in seconds) a server can take to reply to a request. If the server does not reply by the timeout, then the connection will be aborted. The upper bound on these sysctl values is 65535. "default_request_timeout" sets the default timeout if no timeout is specified by the fuse server on mount. 0 (default) indicates no default timeout should be enforced. If the server did specify a timeout, then default_request_timeout will be ignored. "max_request_timeout" sets the max amount of time the server may take to reply to a request. 0 (default) indicates no maximum timeout. If max_request_timeout is set and the fuse server attempts to set a timeout greater than max_request_timeout, the system will use max_request_timeout as the timeout. Similarly, if default_request_timeout is greater than max_request_timeout, the system will use max_request_timeout as the timeout. If the server does not request a timeout and default_request_timeout is set to 0 but max_request_timeout is set, then the timeout will be max_request_timeout. Please note that these timeouts are not 100% precise. The request may take roughly an extra FUSE_TIMEOUT_TIMER_FREQ seconds beyond the set max timeout due to how it's internally implemented. $ sysctl -a | grep fuse.default_request_timeout fs.fuse.default_request_timeout = 0 $ echo 65536 | sudo tee /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout tee: /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout: Invalid argument $ echo 65535 | sudo tee /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout 65535 $ sysctl -a | grep fuse.default_request_timeout fs.fuse.default_request_timeout = 65535 $ echo 0 | sudo tee /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout 0 $ sysctl -a | grep fuse.default_request_timeout fs.fuse.default_request_timeout = 0 [Luis Henriques: Limit the timeout to the range [FUSE_TIMEOUT_TIMER_FREQ, fuse_max_req_timeout]] Signed-off-by: Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Bernd Schubert <bschubert@ddn.com> Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> Reviewed-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org> Reviewed-by: Luis Henriques <luis@igalia.com> Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2025-01-22 13:55:28 -08:00
mm, fs: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and page_cache_{get,release} macros PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time ago with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page cache with bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE. This promise never materialized. And unlikely will. We have many places where PAGE_CACHE_SIZE assumed to be equal to PAGE_SIZE. And it's constant source of confusion on whether PAGE_CACHE_* or PAGE_* constant should be used in a particular case, especially on the border between fs and mm. Global switching to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE would cause to much breakage to be doable. Let's stop pretending that pages in page cache are special. They are not. The changes are pretty straight-forward: - <foo> << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - <foo> >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} -> PAGE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN}; - page_cache_get() -> get_page(); - page_cache_release() -> put_page(); This patch contains automated changes generated with coccinelle using script below. For some reason, coccinelle doesn't patch header files. I've called spatch for them manually. The only adjustment after coccinelle is revert of changes to PAGE_CAHCE_ALIGN definition: we are going to drop it later. There are few places in the code where coccinelle didn't reach. I'll fix them manually in a separate patch. Comments and documentation also will be addressed with the separate patch. virtual patch @@ expression E; @@ - E << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ expression E; @@ - E >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT + PAGE_SHIFT @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SIZE + PAGE_SIZE @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_MASK + PAGE_MASK @@ expression E; @@ - PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(E) + PAGE_ALIGN(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_get(E) + get_page(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_release(E) + put_page(E) Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-04-01 15:29:47 +03:00
fuse: add default_request_timeout and max_request_timeout sysctls Introduce two new sysctls, "default_request_timeout" and "max_request_timeout". These control how long (in seconds) a server can take to reply to a request. If the server does not reply by the timeout, then the connection will be aborted. The upper bound on these sysctl values is 65535. "default_request_timeout" sets the default timeout if no timeout is specified by the fuse server on mount. 0 (default) indicates no default timeout should be enforced. If the server did specify a timeout, then default_request_timeout will be ignored. "max_request_timeout" sets the max amount of time the server may take to reply to a request. 0 (default) indicates no maximum timeout. If max_request_timeout is set and the fuse server attempts to set a timeout greater than max_request_timeout, the system will use max_request_timeout as the timeout. Similarly, if default_request_timeout is greater than max_request_timeout, the system will use max_request_timeout as the timeout. If the server does not request a timeout and default_request_timeout is set to 0 but max_request_timeout is set, then the timeout will be max_request_timeout. Please note that these timeouts are not 100% precise. The request may take roughly an extra FUSE_TIMEOUT_TIMER_FREQ seconds beyond the set max timeout due to how it's internally implemented. $ sysctl -a | grep fuse.default_request_timeout fs.fuse.default_request_timeout = 0 $ echo 65536 | sudo tee /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout tee: /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout: Invalid argument $ echo 65535 | sudo tee /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout 65535 $ sysctl -a | grep fuse.default_request_timeout fs.fuse.default_request_timeout = 65535 $ echo 0 | sudo tee /proc/sys/fs/fuse/default_request_timeout 0 $ sysctl -a | grep fuse.default_request_timeout fs.fuse.default_request_timeout = 0 [Luis Henriques: Limit the timeout to the range [FUSE_TIMEOUT_TIMER_FREQ, fuse_max_req_timeout]] Signed-off-by: Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Bernd Schubert <bschubert@ddn.com> Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> Reviewed-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org> Reviewed-by: Luis Henriques <luis@igalia.com> Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2025-01-22 13:55:28 -08:00
fuse: allow larger read requests by setting bdi->io_pages A FUSE server that advertises a large max_pages and max_write (e.g. max_pages=256, max_write=1MB) cannot currently obtain matching FUSE_READ request sizes from the kernel. Buffered sequential writes arrive at the server at the negotiated max_write size, but a large buffered read() is split into several smaller FUSE_READ requests. For a buffered read, filemap_get_pages() -> page_cache_sync_ra() sizes the read against ractl_max_pages(): max_pages = ractl->ra->ra_pages; if (req_size > max_pages && bdi->io_pages > max_pages) max_pages = min(req_size, bdi->io_pages); fuse leaves bdi->io_pages at the default VM_READAHEAD_PAGES (128KB), so a 1MB read() (req_size = 256 pages) is clamped to the readahead window (128KB, or 256KB for POSIX_FADV_SEQUENTIAL), producing four 256KB FUSE_READ round-trips instead of one. Set bdi->io_pages to fc->max_pages after feature negotiation. As the code above shows, io_pages only raises the limit when the request size already exceeds the readahead window, so it enlarges explicitly requested reads without enlarging the speculative readahead window. This avoids increasing speculative page-cache readahead on behalf of an unprivileged server. NFS does the same, setting io_pages from rpages while leaving ra_pages at the default. fc->max_pages is already bounded by fc->max_pages_limit (and, for virtio-fs, by the virtqueue descriptor count), so io_pages inherits the same bound. Suggested-by: Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Jim Harris <jim.harris@nvidia.com> Assisted-by: Cursor:claude-opus-4.8 Reviewed-by: Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2026-06-22 17:42:27 -07:00
fuse: send security context of inode on file When a new inode is created, send its security context to server along with creation request (FUSE_CREAT, FUSE_MKNOD, FUSE_MKDIR and FUSE_SYMLINK). This gives server an opportunity to create new file and set security context (possibly atomically). In all the configurations it might not be possible to set context atomically. Like nfs and ceph, use security_dentry_init_security() to dermine security context of inode and send it with create, mkdir, mknod, and symlink requests. Following is the information sent to server. fuse_sectx_header, fuse_secctx, xattr_name, security_context - struct fuse_secctx_header This contains total number of security contexts being sent and total size of all the security contexts (including size of fuse_secctx_header). - struct fuse_secctx This contains size of security context which follows this structure. There is one fuse_secctx instance per security context. - xattr name string This string represents name of xattr which should be used while setting security context. - security context This is the actual security context whose size is specified in fuse_secctx struct. Also add the FUSE_SECURITY_CTX flag for the `flags` field of the fuse_init_out struct. When this flag is set the kernel will append the security context for a newly created inode to the request (create, mkdir, mknod, and symlink). The server is responsible for ensuring that the inode appears atomically (preferrably) with the requested security context. For example, If the server is using SELinux and backed by a "real" linux file system that supports extended attributes it can write the security context value to /proc/thread-self/attr/fscreate before making the syscall to create the inode. This patch is based on patch from Chirantan Ekbote <chirantan@chromium.org> Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2021-11-11 09:32:49 -05:00
fuse: add support for explicit export disabling open_by_handle_at(2) can fail with -ESTALE with a valid handle returned by a previous name_to_handle_at(2) for evicted fuse inodes, which is especially common when entry_valid_timeout is 0, e.g. when the fuse daemon is in "cache=none" mode. The time sequence is like: name_to_handle_at(2) # succeed evict fuse inode open_by_handle_at(2) # fail The root cause is that, with 0 entry_valid_timeout, the dput() called in name_to_handle_at(2) will trigger iput -> evict(), which will send FUSE_FORGET to the daemon. The following open_by_handle_at(2) will send a new FUSE_LOOKUP request upon inode cache miss since the previous inode eviction. Then the fuse daemon may fail the FUSE_LOOKUP request with -ENOENT as the cached metadata of the requested inode has already been cleaned up during the previous FUSE_FORGET. The returned -ENOENT is treated as -ESTALE when open_by_handle_at(2) returns. This confuses the application somehow, as open_by_handle_at(2) fails when the previous name_to_handle_at(2) succeeds. The returned errno is also confusing as the requested file is not deleted and already there. It is reasonable to fail name_to_handle_at(2) early in this case, after which the application can fallback to open(2) to access files. Since this issue typically appears when entry_valid_timeout is 0 which is configured by the fuse daemon, the fuse daemon is the right person to explicitly disable the export when required. Also considering FUSE_EXPORT_SUPPORT actually indicates the support for lookups of "." and "..", and there are existing fuse daemons supporting export without FUSE_EXPORT_SUPPORT set, for compatibility, we add a new INIT flag for such purpose. Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-02-26 11:54:35 +08:00
fuse: add io-uring buffer pools Right now, ents and buffers are tightly coupled in fuse io-uring where each entry has its own dedicated payload buffer, requiring N buffers for N entries where each buffer must be large enough to accomodate the maximum payload size. This is suboptimal as most request types (lookup, open, release, getattr, etc) require vastly less bytes than the maximum payload size and some requests (unlink, rmdir, fsync, flush, etc) do not require payload buffers at all. Instead of requiring a 1:1 coupling between ents and payload buffers, allow the server to pass in a buffer pool (a contiguous chunk of memory) that the kernel will use as it wishes for servicing ents/requests. Entries only reserve a "buffer" from the pool while actively processing a request that requires a payload buffer. This decoupling and letting the kernel delegate memory from the pool for requests allows the kernel to optimize memory usage and reduces the memory usage requirements needed to use fuse-over-io-uring. A pool is registered per queue with the new FUSE_IO_URING_CMD_ADD_BUFPOOL command. The server passes the pool's base address and length in fuse_uring_cmd_req.bufpool.{uaddr,len}. Internally, the kernel splits the region into buffers of ring->max_payload_sz bytes each (nr_bufs = pool len / max_payload_sz). A queue commits to a payload mode on first use: registering an entry that carries its own payload selects the legacy per-entry mode, while ADD_BUFPOOL selects pool mode. The two are mutually exclusive, so ADD_BUFPOOL must be issued before any payload-carrying entries are registered on that queue. The queue must have been created before the bufpool is added, through the FUSE_IO_URING_CMD_ADD_QUEUE command. The kernel tracks free buffers with a bitmap (a set bit marks a free buffer). On dispatch, a request that needs a payload claims a free buffer (find_first_bit + clear). A request that needs none claims nothing. The buffer's byte offset within the pool is reported to the server in the new fuse_uring_ent_in_out.offset field so that the server can locate the payload. On completion the buffer is returned to the pool or reused directly if the next request on that entry also has a payload. The FUSE_HAS_IO_URING_BUFPOOL flag advertises kernel support to the server for bufpools. Buffer pool request flow ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | Kernel | FUSE daemon | | | [request arrives] | | [claim a free pool buffer] | | >fuse_uring_select_buffer() | | [copy headers to ring] | | [copy payload to buffer] | | [report buffer offset in ent_in_out] | | >io_uring_cmd_done() | | | [read headers] | | [read/write payload at offset] | | [process request] | | >io_uring_submit() | | COMMIT_AND_FETCH | >fuse_uring_commit_fetch() | | [copy reply from ring] | | [return buffer to the pool] | | >fuse_uring_recycle_buffer() | Reviewed-by: Bernd Schubert <bernd@bsbernd.com> Signed-off-by: Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2026-08-14 11:59:43 -07:00
writeback: don't block sync for filesystems with no data integrity guarantees Add a SB_I_NO_DATA_INTEGRITY superblock flag for filesystems that cannot guarantee data persistence on sync (eg fuse). For superblocks with this flag set, sync kicks off writeback of dirty inodes but does not wait for the flusher threads to complete the writeback. This replaces the per-inode AS_NO_DATA_INTEGRITY mapping flag added in commit f9a49aa302a0 ("fs/writeback: skip AS_NO_DATA_INTEGRITY mappings in wait_sb_inodes()"). The flag belongs at the superblock level because data integrity is a filesystem-wide property, not a per-inode one. Having this flag at the superblock level also allows us to skip having to iterate every dirty inode in wait_sb_inodes() only to skip each inode individually. Prior to this commit, mappings with no data integrity guarantees skipped waiting on writeback completion but still waited on the flusher threads to finish initiating the writeback. Waiting on the flusher threads is unnecessary. This commit kicks off writeback but does not wait on the flusher threads. This change properly addresses a recent report [1] for a suspend-to-RAM hang seen on fuse-overlayfs that was caused by waiting on the flusher threads to finish: Workqueue: pm_fs_sync pm_fs_sync_work_fn Call Trace: <TASK> __schedule+0x457/0x1720 schedule+0x27/0xd0 wb_wait_for_completion+0x97/0xe0 sync_inodes_sb+0xf8/0x2e0 __iterate_supers+0xdc/0x160 ksys_sync+0x43/0xb0 pm_fs_sync_work_fn+0x17/0xa0 process_one_work+0x193/0x350 worker_thread+0x1a1/0x310 kthread+0xfc/0x240 ret_from_fork+0x243/0x280 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 </TASK> On fuse this is problematic because there are paths that may cause the flusher thread to block (eg if systemd freezes the user session cgroups first, which freezes the fuse daemon, before invoking the kernel suspend. The kernel suspend triggers ->write_node() which on fuse issues a synchronous setattr request, which cannot be processed since the daemon is frozen. Or if the daemon is buggy and cannot properly complete writeback, initiating writeback on a dirty folio already under writeback leads to writeback_get_folio() -> folio_prepare_writeback() -> unconditional wait on writeback to finish, which will cause a hang). This commit restores fuse to its prior behavior before tmp folios were removed, where sync was essentially a no-op. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/CAJnrk1a-asuvfrbKXbEwwDSctvemF+6zfhdnuzO65Pt8HsFSRw@mail.gmail.com/T/#m632c4648e9cafc4239299887109ebd880ac6c5c1 Fixes: 0c58a97f919c ("fuse: remove tmp folio for writebacks and internal rb tree") Reported-by: John <therealgraysky@proton.me> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@gmail.com> Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260320005145.2483161-2-joannelkoong@gmail.com Reviewed-by: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand (Arm) <david@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
2026-03-19 17:51:45 -07:00
fuse: add support for explicit export disabling open_by_handle_at(2) can fail with -ESTALE with a valid handle returned by a previous name_to_handle_at(2) for evicted fuse inodes, which is especially common when entry_valid_timeout is 0, e.g. when the fuse daemon is in "cache=none" mode. The time sequence is like: name_to_handle_at(2) # succeed evict fuse inode open_by_handle_at(2) # fail The root cause is that, with 0 entry_valid_timeout, the dput() called in name_to_handle_at(2) will trigger iput -> evict(), which will send FUSE_FORGET to the daemon. The following open_by_handle_at(2) will send a new FUSE_LOOKUP request upon inode cache miss since the previous inode eviction. Then the fuse daemon may fail the FUSE_LOOKUP request with -ENOENT as the cached metadata of the requested inode has already been cleaned up during the previous FUSE_FORGET. The returned -ENOENT is treated as -ESTALE when open_by_handle_at(2) returns. This confuses the application somehow, as open_by_handle_at(2) fails when the previous name_to_handle_at(2) succeeds. The returned errno is also confusing as the requested file is not deleted and already there. It is reasonable to fail name_to_handle_at(2) early in this case, after which the application can fallback to open(2) to access files. Since this issue typically appears when entry_valid_timeout is 0 which is configured by the fuse daemon, the fuse daemon is the right person to explicitly disable the export when required. Also considering FUSE_EXPORT_SUPPORT actually indicates the support for lookups of "." and "..", and there are existing fuse daemons supporting export without FUSE_EXPORT_SUPPORT set, for compatibility, we add a new INIT flag for such purpose. Reviewed-by: Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-02-26 11:54:35 +08:00
fuse: check attributes staleness on fuse_iget() Function fuse_direntplus_link() might call fuse_iget() to initialize a new fuse_inode and change its attributes. If fi->attr_version is always initialized with 0, even if the attributes returned by the FUSE_READDIR request is staled, as the new fi->attr_version is 0, fuse_change_attributes will still set the staled attributes to inode. This wrong behaviour may cause file size inconsistency even when there is no changes from server-side. To reproduce the issue, consider the following 2 programs (A and B) are running concurrently, A B ---------------------------------- -------------------------------- { /fusemnt/dir/f is a file path in a fuse mount, the size of f is 0. } readdir(/fusemnt/dir) start //Daemon set size 0 to f direntry fallocate(f, 1024) stat(f) // B see size 1024 echo 2 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches readdir(/fusemnt/dir) reply to kernel Kernel set 0 to the I_NEW inode stat(f) // B see size 0 In the above case, only program B is modifying the file size, however, B observes file size changing between the 2 'readonly' stat() calls. To fix this issue, we should make sure readdirplus still follows the rule of attr_version staleness checking even if the fi->attr_version is lost due to inode eviction. To identify this situation, the new fc->evict_ctr is used to record whether the eviction of inodes occurs during the readdirplus request processing. If it does, the result of readdirplus may be inaccurate; otherwise, the result of readdirplus can be trusted. Although this may still lead to incorrect invalidation, considering the relatively low frequency of evict occurrences, it should be acceptable. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230711043405.66256-2-zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20241114070905.48901-1-zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com/ Reported-by: Jiachen Zhang <zhangjiachen.jaycee@bytedance.com> Suggested-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Zhang Tianci <zhangtianci.1997@bytedance.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2024-11-18 18:16:00 +08:00
fuse: check for NULL root inode in fuse_fill_super_submount fuse_iget() can return NULL when its inode allocation fails, but fuse_fill_super_submount() passed the result straight to get_fuse_inode() and decremented fi->nlookup without checking it: root = fuse_iget(sb, parent_fi->nodeid, ...); fi = get_fuse_inode(root); fi->nlookup--; Inside fuse_iget() the inode allocation can fail and return NULL. The submount root takes the iget5_locked() path, whose alloc_inode() can fail under memory pressure (the auto-submount branch can fail the same way in new_inode() or fuse_alloc_submount_lookup()): inode = iget5_locked(sb, nodeid, fuse_inode_eq, fuse_inode_set, &nodeid); if (!inode) return NULL; A NULL root makes get_fuse_inode() a container_of() on NULL and the nlookup decrement a write to a bogus address, oopsing the mount. With CONFIG_KASAN the following null pointer dereference is reported when the root inode allocation of an auto-submount fails (e.g. under memory pressure): ================================================================== BUG: KASAN: null-ptr-deref in fuse_get_tree_submount+0x656/0x8b0 Read of size 8 at addr 00000000000002b0 by task ls/942 CPU: 0 PID: 942 Comm: ls Tainted: G W 6.6 #15 Call Trace: <TASK> fuse_get_tree_submount+0x656/0x8b0 vfs_get_tree+0x48/0x140 fc_mount+0x13/0x50 fuse_dentry_automount+0x7a/0xb0 __traverse_mounts+0xca/0x330 step_into+0x339/0xac0 path_lookupat+0xc5/0x2f0 filename_lookup+0x163/0x2a0 vfs_statx+0xd5/0x200 do_statx+0x83/0xd0 __x64_sys_statx+0xa0/0xc0 do_syscall_64+0x37/0x90 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x78/0xe2 </TASK> ================================================================== Return -ENOMEM instead; the caller tears down the partially built superblock on error, matching the other error returns in this function. Fixes: 1866d779d5d2 ("fuse: Allow fuse_fill_super_common() for submounts") Signed-off-by: Baokun Li <libaokun@linux.alibaba.com> Reviewed-by: Jingbo Xu <jefflexu@linux.alibaba.com> Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
2026-08-08 12:13:39 +08:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
Rename superblock flags (MS_xyz -> SB_xyz) This is a pure automated search-and-replace of the internal kernel superblock flags. The s_flags are now called SB_*, with the names and the values for the moment mirroring the MS_* flags that they're equivalent to. Note how the MS_xyz flags are the ones passed to the mount system call, while the SB_xyz flags are what we then use in sb->s_flags. The script to do this was: # places to look in; re security/*: it generally should *not* be # touched (that stuff parses mount(2) arguments directly), but # there are two places where we really deal with superblock flags. FILES="drivers/mtd drivers/staging/lustre fs ipc mm \ include/linux/fs.h include/uapi/linux/bfs_fs.h \ security/apparmor/apparmorfs.c security/apparmor/include/lib.h" # the list of MS_... constants SYMS="RDONLY NOSUID NODEV NOEXEC SYNCHRONOUS REMOUNT MANDLOCK \ DIRSYNC NOATIME NODIRATIME BIND MOVE REC VERBOSE SILENT \ POSIXACL UNBINDABLE PRIVATE SLAVE SHARED RELATIME KERNMOUNT \ I_VERSION STRICTATIME LAZYTIME SUBMOUNT NOREMOTELOCK NOSEC BORN \ ACTIVE NOUSER" SED_PROG= for i in $SYMS; do SED_PROG="$SED_PROG -e s/MS_$i/SB_$i/g"; done # we want files that contain at least one of MS_..., # with fs/namespace.c and fs/pnode.c excluded. L=$(for i in $SYMS; do git grep -w -l MS_$i $FILES; done| sort|uniq|grep -v '^fs/namespace.c'|grep -v '^fs/pnode.c') for f in $L; do sed -i $f $SED_PROG; done Requested-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2017-11-27 13:05:09 -08:00
mm, fs: get rid of PAGE_CACHE_* and page_cache_{get,release} macros PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} macros were introduced *long* time ago with promise that one day it will be possible to implement page cache with bigger chunks than PAGE_SIZE. This promise never materialized. And unlikely will. We have many places where PAGE_CACHE_SIZE assumed to be equal to PAGE_SIZE. And it's constant source of confusion on whether PAGE_CACHE_* or PAGE_* constant should be used in a particular case, especially on the border between fs and mm. Global switching to PAGE_CACHE_SIZE != PAGE_SIZE would cause to much breakage to be doable. Let's stop pretending that pages in page cache are special. They are not. The changes are pretty straight-forward: - <foo> << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - <foo> >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) -> <foo>; - PAGE_CACHE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN} -> PAGE_{SIZE,SHIFT,MASK,ALIGN}; - page_cache_get() -> get_page(); - page_cache_release() -> put_page(); This patch contains automated changes generated with coccinelle using script below. For some reason, coccinelle doesn't patch header files. I've called spatch for them manually. The only adjustment after coccinelle is revert of changes to PAGE_CAHCE_ALIGN definition: we are going to drop it later. There are few places in the code where coccinelle didn't reach. I'll fix them manually in a separate patch. Comments and documentation also will be addressed with the separate patch. virtual patch @@ expression E; @@ - E << (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ expression E; @@ - E >> (PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT - PAGE_SHIFT) + E @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SHIFT + PAGE_SHIFT @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_SIZE + PAGE_SIZE @@ @@ - PAGE_CACHE_MASK + PAGE_MASK @@ expression E; @@ - PAGE_CACHE_ALIGN(E) + PAGE_ALIGN(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_get(E) + get_page(E) @@ expression E; @@ - page_cache_release(E) + put_page(E) Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2016-04-01 15:29:47 +03:00
Rename superblock flags (MS_xyz -> SB_xyz) This is a pure automated search-and-replace of the internal kernel superblock flags. The s_flags are now called SB_*, with the names and the values for the moment mirroring the MS_* flags that they're equivalent to. Note how the MS_xyz flags are the ones passed to the mount system call, while the SB_xyz flags are what we then use in sb->s_flags. The script to do this was: # places to look in; re security/*: it generally should *not* be # touched (that stuff parses mount(2) arguments directly), but # there are two places where we really deal with superblock flags. FILES="drivers/mtd drivers/staging/lustre fs ipc mm \ include/linux/fs.h include/uapi/linux/bfs_fs.h \ security/apparmor/apparmorfs.c security/apparmor/include/lib.h" # the list of MS_... constants SYMS="RDONLY NOSUID NODEV NOEXEC SYNCHRONOUS REMOUNT MANDLOCK \ DIRSYNC NOATIME NODIRATIME BIND MOVE REC VERBOSE SILENT \ POSIXACL UNBINDABLE PRIVATE SLAVE SHARED RELATIME KERNMOUNT \ I_VERSION STRICTATIME LAZYTIME SUBMOUNT NOREMOTELOCK NOSEC BORN \ ACTIVE NOUSER" SED_PROG= for i in $SYMS; do SED_PROG="$SED_PROG -e s/MS_$i/SB_$i/g"; done # we want files that contain at least one of MS_..., # with fs/namespace.c and fs/pnode.c excluded. L=$(for i in $SYMS; do git grep -w -l MS_$i $FILES; done| sort|uniq|grep -v '^fs/namespace.c'|grep -v '^fs/pnode.c') for f in $L; do sed -i $f $SED_PROG; done Requested-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2017-11-27 13:05:09 -08:00
Rename superblock flags (MS_xyz -> SB_xyz) This is a pure automated search-and-replace of the internal kernel superblock flags. The s_flags are now called SB_*, with the names and the values for the moment mirroring the MS_* flags that they're equivalent to. Note how the MS_xyz flags are the ones passed to the mount system call, while the SB_xyz flags are what we then use in sb->s_flags. The script to do this was: # places to look in; re security/*: it generally should *not* be # touched (that stuff parses mount(2) arguments directly), but # there are two places where we really deal with superblock flags. FILES="drivers/mtd drivers/staging/lustre fs ipc mm \ include/linux/fs.h include/uapi/linux/bfs_fs.h \ security/apparmor/apparmorfs.c security/apparmor/include/lib.h" # the list of MS_... constants SYMS="RDONLY NOSUID NODEV NOEXEC SYNCHRONOUS REMOUNT MANDLOCK \ DIRSYNC NOATIME NODIRATIME BIND MOVE REC VERBOSE SILENT \ POSIXACL UNBINDABLE PRIVATE SLAVE SHARED RELATIME KERNMOUNT \ I_VERSION STRICTATIME LAZYTIME SUBMOUNT NOREMOTELOCK NOSEC BORN \ ACTIVE NOUSER" SED_PROG= for i in $SYMS; do SED_PROG="$SED_PROG -e s/MS_$i/SB_$i/g"; done # we want files that contain at least one of MS_..., # with fs/namespace.c and fs/pnode.c excluded. L=$(for i in $SYMS; do git grep -w -l MS_$i $FILES; done| sort|uniq|grep -v '^fs/namespace.c'|grep -v '^fs/pnode.c') for f in $L; do sed -i $f $SED_PROG; done Requested-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
2017-11-27 13:05:09 -08:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
fs: Limit sys_mount to only request filesystem modules. Modify the request_module to prefix the file system type with "fs-" and add aliases to all of the filesystems that can be built as modules to match. A common practice is to build all of the kernel code and leave code that is not commonly needed as modules, with the result that many users are exposed to any bug anywhere in the kernel. Looking for filesystems with a fs- prefix limits the pool of possible modules that can be loaded by mount to just filesystems trivially making things safer with no real cost. Using aliases means user space can control the policy of which filesystem modules are auto-loaded by editing /etc/modprobe.d/*.conf with blacklist and alias directives. Allowing simple, safe, well understood work-arounds to known problematic software. This also addresses a rare but unfortunate problem where the filesystem name is not the same as it's module name and module auto-loading would not work. While writing this patch I saw a handful of such cases. The most significant being autofs that lives in the module autofs4. This is relevant to user namespaces because we can reach the request module in get_fs_type() without having any special permissions, and people get uncomfortable when a user specified string (in this case the filesystem type) goes all of the way to request_module. After having looked at this issue I don't think there is any particular reason to perform any filtering or permission checks beyond making it clear in the module request that we want a filesystem module. The common pattern in the kernel is to call request_module() without regards to the users permissions. In general all a filesystem module does once loaded is call register_filesystem() and go to sleep. Which means there is not much attack surface exposed by loading a filesytem module unless the filesystem is mounted. In a user namespace filesystems are not mounted unless .fs_flags = FS_USERNS_MOUNT, which most filesystems do not set today. Acked-by: Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@canonical.com> Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Reported-by: Kees Cook <keescook@google.com> Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
2013-03-02 19:39:14 -08:00
fs: Limit sys_mount to only request filesystem modules. Modify the request_module to prefix the file system type with "fs-" and add aliases to all of the filesystems that can be built as modules to match. A common practice is to build all of the kernel code and leave code that is not commonly needed as modules, with the result that many users are exposed to any bug anywhere in the kernel. Looking for filesystems with a fs- prefix limits the pool of possible modules that can be loaded by mount to just filesystems trivially making things safer with no real cost. Using aliases means user space can control the policy of which filesystem modules are auto-loaded by editing /etc/modprobe.d/*.conf with blacklist and alias directives. Allowing simple, safe, well understood work-arounds to known problematic software. This also addresses a rare but unfortunate problem where the filesystem name is not the same as it's module name and module auto-loading would not work. While writing this patch I saw a handful of such cases. The most significant being autofs that lives in the module autofs4. This is relevant to user namespaces because we can reach the request module in get_fs_type() without having any special permissions, and people get uncomfortable when a user specified string (in this case the filesystem type) goes all of the way to request_module. After having looked at this issue I don't think there is any particular reason to perform any filtering or permission checks beyond making it clear in the module request that we want a filesystem module. The common pattern in the kernel is to call request_module() without regards to the users permissions. In general all a filesystem module does once loaded is call register_filesystem() and go to sleep. Which means there is not much attack surface exposed by loading a filesytem module unless the filesystem is mounted. In a user namespace filesystems are not mounted unless .fs_flags = FS_USERNS_MOUNT, which most filesystems do not set today. Acked-by: Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@canonical.com> Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Reported-by: Kees Cook <keescook@google.com> Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
2013-03-02 19:39:14 -08:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00
[PATCH] FUSE - core This patch adds FUSE core. This contains the following files: o inode.c - superblock operations (alloc_inode, destroy_inode, read_inode, clear_inode, put_super, show_options) - registers FUSE filesystem o fuse_i.h - private header file Requirements ============ The most important difference between orinary filesystems and FUSE is the fact, that the filesystem data/metadata is provided by a userspace process run with the privileges of the mount "owner" instead of the kernel, or some remote entity usually running with elevated privileges. The security implication of this is that a non-privileged user must not be able to use this capability to compromise the system. Obvious requirements arising from this are: - mount owner should not be able to get elevated privileges with the help of the mounted filesystem - mount owner should not be able to induce undesired behavior in other users' or the super user's processes - mount owner should not get illegitimate access to information from other users' and the super user's processes These are currently ensured with the following constraints: 1) mount is only allowed to directory or file which the mount owner can modify without limitation (write access + no sticky bit for directories) 2) nosuid,nodev mount options are forced 3) any process running with fsuid different from the owner is denied all access to the filesystem 1) and 2) are ensured by the "fusermount" mount utility which is a setuid root application doing the actual mount operation. 3) is ensured by a check in the permission() method in kernel I started thinking about doing 3) in a different way because Christoph H. made a big deal out of it, saying that FUSE is unacceptable into mainline in this form. The suggested use of private namespaces would be OK, but in their current form have many limitations that make their use impractical (as discussed in this thread). Suggested improvements that would address these limitations: - implement shared subtrees - allow a process to join an existing namespace (make namespaces first-class objects) - implement the namespace creation/joining in a PAM module With all that in place the check of owner against current->fsuid may be removed from the FUSE kernel module, without compromising the security requirements. Suid programs still interesting questions, since they get access even to the private namespace causing some information leak (exact order/timing of filesystem operations performed), giving some ptrace-like capabilities to unprivileged users. BTW this problem is not strictly limited to the namespace approach, since suid programs setting fsuid and accessing users' files will succeed with the current approach too. Signed-off-by: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
2005-09-09 13:10:26 -07:00