Re: [REVIEW][PATCH 1/2] userns: Better restrictions on when procand sysfs can be mounted

[Gao feng]

On 11/02/2013 02:06 PM, Gao feng wrote:
> Hi Eric,
> 
> On 08/28/2013 05:44 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> Rely on the fact that another flavor of the filesystem is already
>> mounted and do not rely on state in the user namespace.
>>
>> Verify that the mounted filesystem is not covered in any significant
>> way.  I would love to verify that the previously mounted filesystem
>> has no mounts on top but there are at least the directories
>> /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc and /sys/fs/cgroup/ that exist explicitly
>> for other filesystems to mount on top of.
>>
>> Refactor the test into a function named fs_fully_visible and call that
>> function from the mount routines of proc and sysfs.  This makes this
>> test local to the filesystems involved and the results current of when
>> the mounts take place, removing a weird threading of the user
>> namespace, the mount namespace and the filesystems themselves.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  fs/namespace.c                 |   37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>>  fs/proc/root.c                 |    7 +++++--
>>  fs/sysfs/mount.c               |    3 ++-
>>  include/linux/fs.h             |    1 +
>>  include/linux/user_namespace.h |    4 ----
>>  kernel/user.c                  |    2 --
>>  kernel/user_namespace.c        |    2 --
>>  7 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/namespace.c b/fs/namespace.c
>> index 64627f8..877e427 100644
>> --- a/fs/namespace.c
>> +++ b/fs/namespace.c
>> @@ -2867,25 +2867,38 @@ bool current_chrooted(void)
>>  	return chrooted;
>>  }
>>  
>> -void update_mnt_policy(struct user_namespace *userns)
>> +bool fs_fully_visible(struct file_system_type *type)
>>  {
>>  	struct mnt_namespace *ns = current->nsproxy->mnt_ns;
>>  	struct mount *mnt;
>> +	bool visible = false;
>>  
>> -	down_read(&namespace_sem);
>> +	if (unlikely(!ns))
>> +		return false;
>> +
>> +	namespace_lock();
>>  	list_for_each_entry(mnt, &ns->list, mnt_list) {
>> -		switch (mnt->mnt.mnt_sb->s_magic) {
>> -		case SYSFS_MAGIC:
>> -			userns->may_mount_sysfs = true;
>> -			break;
>> -		case PROC_SUPER_MAGIC:
>> -			userns->may_mount_proc = true;
>> -			break;
>> +		struct mount *child;
>> +		if (mnt->mnt.mnt_sb->s_type != type)
>> +			continue;
>> +
>> +		/* This mount is not fully visible if there are any child mounts
>> +		 * that cover anything except for empty directories.
>> +		 */
>> +		list_for_each_entry(child, &mnt->mnt_mounts, mnt_child) {
>> +			struct inode *inode = child->mnt_mountpoint->d_inode;
>> +			if (!S_ISDIR(inode->i_mode))
>> +				goto next;
>> +			if (inode->i_nlink != 2)
>> +				goto next;
> 
> 
> I met a problem that proc filesystem failed to mount in user namespace,
> The problem is the i_nlink of sysctl entries under proc filesystem is not
> 2. it always is 1 even it's a directory, see proc_sys_make_inode. and for
> btrfs, the i_nlink for an empty dir is 2 too. it seems like depends on the
> filesystem itself,not depends on vfs. In my system binfmt_misc is mounted
> on /proc/sys/fs/binfmt_misc, and the i_nlink of this directory's inode is
> 1.
> 
> btw, I'm not quite understand what's the inode->i_nlink != 2 here means?
> is this directory empty? as I know, when we create a file(not dir) under
> a dir, the i_nlink of this dir will not increase.
> 
> And another question, it looks like if we don't have proc/sys fs mounted,
> then proc/sys will be failed to be mounted?
> 

Any Idea?? or should we need to revert this patch??

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/