summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/Documentation/filesystems
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>2025-03-24 10:37:40 -0700
committerLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>2025-03-24 10:37:40 -0700
commit804382d59b81b331735d37a18149ea0d36d5936a (patch)
tree8285c9847fa27f6ebaff7f89b64b98f4ed22c199 /Documentation/filesystems
parent0ec0d4ecdd8bda4d55c5ba7b11b1595df36e3179 (diff)
parent9c27e5cc39bb7848051c42500207aa3a7f63558c (diff)
Merge tag 'vfs-6.15-rc1.overlayfs' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vfs/vfs
Pull vfs overlayfs updates from Christian Brauner: "Currently overlayfs uses the mounter's credentials for its override_creds() calls. That provides a consistent permission model. This patches allows a caller to instruct overlayfs to use its credentials instead. The caller must be located in the same user namespace hierarchy as the user namespace the overlayfs instance will be mounted in. This provides a consistent and simple security model. With this it is possible to e.g., mount an overlayfs instance where the mounter must have CAP_SYS_ADMIN but the credentials used for override_creds() have dropped CAP_SYS_ADMIN. It also allows the usage of custom fs{g,u}id different from the callers and other tweaks" * tag 'vfs-6.15-rc1.overlayfs' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/vfs/vfs: selftests/ovl: add third selftest for "override_creds" selftests/ovl: add second selftest for "override_creds" selftests/filesystems: add utils.{c,h} selftests/ovl: add first selftest for "override_creds" ovl: allow to specify override credentials
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/filesystems')
-rw-r--r--Documentation/filesystems/overlayfs.rst24
1 files changed, 19 insertions, 5 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/overlayfs.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/overlayfs.rst
index 6245b67ae9e0..2db379b4b31e 100644
--- a/Documentation/filesystems/overlayfs.rst
+++ b/Documentation/filesystems/overlayfs.rst
@@ -292,13 +292,27 @@ rename or unlink will of course be noticed and handled).
Permission model
----------------
+An overlay filesystem stashes credentials that will be used when
+accessing lower or upper filesystems.
+
+In the old mount api the credentials of the task calling mount(2) are
+stashed. In the new mount api the credentials of the task creating the
+superblock through FSCONFIG_CMD_CREATE command of fsconfig(2) are
+stashed.
+
+Starting with kernel v6.15 it is possible to use the "override_creds"
+mount option which will cause the credentials of the calling task to be
+recorded. Note that "override_creds" is only meaningful when used with
+the new mount api as the old mount api combines setting options and
+superblock creation in a single mount(2) syscall.
+
Permission checking in the overlay filesystem follows these principles:
1) permission check SHOULD return the same result before and after copy up
2) task creating the overlay mount MUST NOT gain additional privileges
- 3) non-mounting task MAY gain additional privileges through the overlay,
+ 3) task[*] MAY gain additional privileges through the overlay,
compared to direct access on underlying lower or upper filesystems
This is achieved by performing two permission checks on each access:
@@ -306,7 +320,7 @@ This is achieved by performing two permission checks on each access:
a) check if current task is allowed access based on local DAC (owner,
group, mode and posix acl), as well as MAC checks
- b) check if mounting task would be allowed real operation on lower or
+ b) check if stashed credentials would be allowed real operation on lower or
upper layer based on underlying filesystem permissions, again including
MAC checks
@@ -315,10 +329,10 @@ are copied up. On the other hand it can result in server enforced
permissions (used by NFS, for example) being ignored (3).
Check (b) ensures that no task gains permissions to underlying layers that
-the mounting task does not have (2). This also means that it is possible
+the stashed credentials do not have (2). This also means that it is possible
to create setups where the consistency rule (1) does not hold; normally,
-however, the mounting task will have sufficient privileges to perform all
-operations.
+however, the stashed credentials will have sufficient privileges to
+perform all operations.
Another way to demonstrate this model is drawing parallels between::