Re: [PATCH 3/4] listmount: small changes in semantics
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Date: 2023-12-06 20:24:58
Also in:
linux-fsdevel, linux-man, linux-security-module
From: Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Date: 2023-12-06 20:24:58
Also in:
linux-fsdevel, linux-man, linux-security-module
On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 at 20:58, Serge E. Hallyn [off-list ref] wrote:
On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 05:03:34PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
quoted
- if (!is_path_reachable(m, mnt->mnt_root, &rootmnt)) - return capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) ? 0 : -EPERM; + if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) &&Was there a reason to do the capable check first? In general, checking capable() when not needed is frowned upon, as it will set the PF_SUPERPRIV flag.
I synchronized the permission checking with statmount() without thinking about the order. I guess we can change the order back in both syscalls? I also don't understand the reason behind the using the _noaudit() variant. Christian? Thanks, Miklos