reopen 59987 thanks On Mon, Oct 17, 2005 at 04:09:35PM -0400, Eric Lammerts wrote: > Debian Bug Tracking System wrote: > >I tried to reproduce this old bug report http://bugs.debian.org/59987 > >(uhh below 100000;)):
> >/etc/fstab: > >//localhost/tmp /testdir smbfs username=3Dnk,uid=3D1000,user,noauto > >drwxr-xr-x 1 nk nk 4096 2005-10-17 20:47 /testdir/ > >$ mount /testdir/ > >Password: > >$ df > >... > >//localhost/tmp 93745152 59402240 34342912 64% /testdir > >So with samba 3.0.14a the reported problem is not there anymore.:) > I tried it too, but still got the error. If I look at my original patch it > seems the bug is triggered when the directory is not owned by the user. So > could you try again with /testdir owned by root? That should be allowed, > shouldn't it? Right; the fundamental problem here is that smbfs tries to support two completely different security models for who's allowed to mount what, and they occasionally step on each other. If there is an fstab entry for the mount, then yes, users should be allowed to mount over mountpoints that are owned by root. If there is no fstab entry for the mount (i.e., the user calls smbmount instead of mount and smbmnt is suid), then users should only be allowed to mount over mountpoints that they own. This bug has gone unfixed because the code needs some rather deep reorganization to do the right thing. Eric, the patch you submitted isn't sufficient because it introduces a security hole in the smbmount use case. The bug may never actually get fixed in smbfs; odds are better that this will be dealt with in cifs instead. Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
