From: "Colin Walters" <walters@verbum.org>
To: "Gao Xiang" <hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com>, linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] erofs: fix incorrect symlink detection in fast symlink
Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2024 10:46:28 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <91310d4c-98d5-4a8b-b3db-2043d4a3d533@app.fastmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <df09821e-d7ca-4bfb-8f57-2046c072af62@linux.alibaba.com>
On Mon, Sep 9, 2024, at 10:14 AM, Gao Xiang wrote:
>
> Not quite sure about hard limitation in EROFS
> runtime, we could define
>
> #define EROFS_SYMLINK_MAXLEN 4096
Not sure that a new define is needed versus just reusing PATH_MAX, but that's obviously just a style thing that's much more your call than mine.
> But since symlink i_size > 4096 only due to crafted
> images (and not generated by mkfs) and not crash, so
> either way (to check or not check in kernel) is okay
> to me.
Yes, but my understanding was that EROFS (in contrast to other kernel read-write filesystems which are more complicated) was aiming to be robust against potentially malicious images.
Crafted/malicious images aside, there's also the IMO obvious angle here that we should avoid crashes or worse out-of-bound read/write if there happens to be *accidental* on-disk/memory corruption and having high bit(s) flip in a symlink inode size seems like an easy one to handle. Skimming the XFS code for example it looks like it's pretty robust in this area.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-09-09 14:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-09 2:28 [PATCH] " Gao Xiang
2024-09-09 2:37 ` Gao Xiang
2024-09-09 3:19 ` [PATCH v2] " Gao Xiang
2024-09-09 12:48 ` Colin Walters
2024-09-09 13:21 ` Gao Xiang
2024-09-09 13:58 ` Colin Walters
2024-09-09 14:14 ` Gao Xiang
2024-09-09 14:46 ` Colin Walters [this message]
2024-09-09 15:40 ` Gao Xiang
2024-09-10 0:12 ` Colin Walters
2024-09-10 2:18 ` Gao Xiang
2024-09-10 20:51 ` Colin Walters
2024-09-11 2:27 ` Gao Xiang
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=91310d4c-98d5-4a8b-b3db-2043d4a3d533@app.fastmail.com \
--to=walters@verbum.org \
--cc=hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=linux-erofs@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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®