mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Pali Rohár" <pali@kernel.org>
To: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Cc: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
	Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
	Olga Kornievskaia <okorniev@redhat.com>,
	Dai Ngo <Dai.Ngo@oracle.com>, Tom Talpey <tom@talpey.com>,
	linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfsd: Fix NFSD_MAY_BYPASS_GSS and NFSD_MAY_BYPASS_GSS_ON_ROOT
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2024 00:29:18 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241006222918.jnf4odeoyq6u7l5m@pali> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <172825279728.1692160.16291277027217742776@noble.neil.brown.name>

On Monday 07 October 2024 09:13:17 NeilBrown wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Oct 2024, Chuck Lever wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 08:52:20AM +1000, NeilBrown wrote:
> > > On Fri, 13 Sep 2024, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > > Currently NFSD_MAY_BYPASS_GSS and NFSD_MAY_BYPASS_GSS_ON_ROOT do not bypass
> > > > only GSS, but bypass any authentication method. This is problem specially
> > > > for NFS3 AUTH_NULL-only exports.
> > > > 
> > > > The purpose of NFSD_MAY_BYPASS_GSS_ON_ROOT is described in RFC 2623,
> > > > section 2.3.2, to allow mounting NFS2/3 GSS-only export without
> > > > authentication. So few procedures which do not expose security risk used
> > > > during mount time can be called also with AUTH_NONE or AUTH_SYS, to allow
> > > > client mount operation to finish successfully.
> > > > 
> > > > The problem with current implementation is that for AUTH_NULL-only exports,
> > > > the NFSD_MAY_BYPASS_GSS_ON_ROOT is active also for NFS3 AUTH_UNIX mount
> > > > attempts which confuse NFS3 clients, and make them think that AUTH_UNIX is
> > > > enabled and is working. Linux NFS3 client never switches from AUTH_UNIX to
> > > > AUTH_NONE on active mount, which makes the mount inaccessible.
> > > > 
> > > > Fix the NFSD_MAY_BYPASS_GSS and NFSD_MAY_BYPASS_GSS_ON_ROOT implementation
> > > > and really allow to bypass only exports which have some GSS auth flavor
> > > > enabled.
> > > > 
> > > > The result would be: For AUTH_NULL-only export if client attempts to do
> > > > mount with AUTH_UNIX flavor then it will receive access errors, which
> > > > instruct client that AUTH_UNIX flavor is not usable and will either try
> > > > other auth flavor (AUTH_NULL if enabled) or fails mount procedure.
> > > > 
> > > > This should fix problems with AUTH_NULL-only or AUTH_UNIX-only exports if
> > > > client attempts to mount it with other auth flavor (e.g. with AUTH_NULL for
> > > > AUTH_UNIX-only export, or with AUTH_UNIX for AUTH_NULL-only export).
> > > 
> > > The MAY_BYPASS_GSS flag currently also bypasses TLS restrictions.  With
> > > your change it doesn't.  I don't think we want to make that change.
> > 
> > Neil, I'm not seeing this, I must be missing something.
> > 
> > RPC_AUTH_TLS is used only on NULL procedures.
> > 
> > The export's xprtsec= setting determines whether a TLS session must
> > be present to access the files on the export. If the TLS session
> > meets the xprtsec= policy, then the normal user authentication
> > settings apply. In other words, I don't think execution gets close
> > to check_nfsd_access() unless the xprtsec policy setting is met.
> 
> check_nfsd_access() is literally the ONLY place that ->ex_xprtsec_modes
> is tested and that seems to be where xprtsec= export settings are stored.
> 
> > 
> > I'm not convinced check_nfsd_access() needs to care about
> > RPC_AUTH_TLS. Can you expand a little on your concern?
> 
> Probably it doesn't care about RPC_AUTH_TLS which as you say is only
> used on NULL procedures when setting up the TLS connection.
> 
> But it *does* care about NFS_XPRTSEC_MTLS etc.
> 
> But I now see that RPC_AUTH_TLS is never reported by OP_SECINFO as an
> acceptable flavour, so the client cannot dynamically determine that TLS
> is required.

Why is not RPC_AUTH_TLS announced in NFS4 OP_SECINFO? Should not NFS4
OP_SECINFO report all possible auth methods for particular filehandle?

> So there is no value in giving non-tls clients access to
> xprtsec=mtls exports so they can discover that for themselves.  The
> client needs to explicitly mount with tls, or possibly the client can
> opportunistically try TLS in every case, and call back.
> 
> So the original patch is OK.
> 
> NeilBrown

  reply	other threads:[~2024-10-06 22:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-09-12 22:19 Pali Rohár
2024-09-12 22:52 ` NeilBrown
2024-09-12 23:00   ` Pali Rohár
2024-10-06 17:50   ` Chuck Lever
2024-10-06 22:13     ` NeilBrown
2024-10-06 22:29       ` Pali Rohár [this message]
2024-10-06 22:58         ` Chuck Lever III
2024-10-06 23:36           ` NeilBrown
2024-10-07 15:50             ` Chuck Lever III
2024-10-08  1:17               ` Rick Macklem
2024-10-08 18:54       ` Pali Rohár
2024-10-08 18:57       ` Chuck Lever
2024-10-08 21:47         ` NeilBrown
2024-10-09 19:55           ` Chuck Lever
2024-10-09 20:14             ` NeilBrown
2024-10-09 23:30               ` Chuck Lever
2024-10-10 20:49                 ` NeilBrown
2024-10-05 16:40 ` [PATCH v2] " Pali Rohár
2024-10-09 18:41   ` cel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20241006222918.jnf4odeoyq6u7l5m@pali \
    --to=pali@kernel.org \
    --cc=Dai.Ngo@oracle.com \
    --cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
    --cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=okorniev@redhat.com \
    --cc=tom@talpey.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®