[WIP,2/4] bpf: Don't require mknod() permission to pin an object
diff mbox series

Message ID 3bb110117c983f781f545e69ce35d4fcdd0c543b.1565040372.git.luto@kernel.org
State New
Headers show
  • bpf: A bit of progress toward unprivileged use
Related show

Commit Message

Andy Lutomirski Aug. 5, 2019, 9:29 p.m. UTC
security_path_mknod() seems excessive for pinning an object --
pinning an object is effectively just creating a file.  It's also
redundant, as vfs_mkobj() calls security_inode_create() by itself.

This isn't strictly required -- mknod(path, S_IFREG, unused) works
to create regular files, but bpf is currently the only user in the
kernel outside of mknod() itself that uses it to create regular
(i.e. S_IFREG) files.

Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
 kernel/bpf/inode.c | 4 ----
 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)

diff mbox series

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/inode.c b/kernel/bpf/inode.c
index cb07736b33ae..14304609003a 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/inode.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/inode.c
@@ -394,10 +394,6 @@  static int bpf_obj_do_pin(const struct filename *pathname, void *raw,
 	mode = S_IFREG | ((S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR) & ~current_umask());
-	ret = security_path_mknod(&path, dentry, mode, 0);
-	if (ret)
-		goto out;
 	dir = d_inode(path.dentry);
 	if (dir->i_op != &bpf_dir_iops) {
 		ret = -EPERM;