On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 04:39:05PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
> Tim Newsham wrote:
> > The tmpfs filesystem allows the mounting user to specify a
> > username, a groupname or a device name for the root node of
> > the filesystem. A user that specifies a value of VNOVAL for
> > any of these fields
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 05:06:33PM -0400, Ted Unangst wrote:
> Todd C. Miller wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 16:39:05 -0400, "Ted Unangst" wrote:
> >
> > > sigh. i don't know what else can trigger that kassert, so just fix the
> > > caller
> > > to do the same check and return an error.
> >
> >
On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 17:06:33 -0400, "Ted Unangst" wrote:
> those checks are equally useless. UID_MAX is UINT_MAX so the tests don't fire
> .
>
> the question is what other tmpfs code blows up when nodes owned by -1 start
> showing up.
Fair enough. But this bit can never be true:
Todd C. Miller wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 16:39:05 -0400, "Ted Unangst" wrote:
>
> > sigh. i don't know what else can trigger that kassert, so just fix the
> > caller
> > to do the same check and return an error.
>
> Checking for VNOVAL is kind of bogus. How about we try something
> more
On Mon, 11 Jul 2016 16:39:05 -0400, "Ted Unangst" wrote:
> sigh. i don't know what else can trigger that kassert, so just fix the caller
> to do the same check and return an error.
Checking for VNOVAL is kind of bogus. How about we try something
more sensible?
- todd
Index: tmpfs_subr.c
Tim Newsham wrote:
> The tmpfs filesystem allows the mounting user to specify a
> username, a groupname or a device name for the root node of
> the filesystem. A user that specifies a value of VNOVAL for
> any of these fields will trigger an assert in tmpfs_alloc_node():
>
> /* XXX pedro: we
Here's a bug related to tmpfs mounts.
Forwarded Message
Subject:[Bug49] Tmpfs mount with bad args can lead to a panic
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 10:07:33 -1000
From: Tim Newsham <tim.newsham@nccgroup.trust>
To: dera...@openbsd.org, Jesse Hertz <Je
