A discussion within Debian again brought up the problem that:

1) Automounting of removable media exposes the kernel to a lot of 
untrusted input 
2) Kernel upstream are not terribly concerned with ensuring that kernel 
filesystems are resilient against deliberately malformed filesystems so 
are mostly not proactively looking for bugs there
3) Uncommonly used filesystems are less likely to be tested against 
adverse input in the real world and so are more likely to contain 
exploitable bugs

There are various cases where people do need to make use of uncommon 
filesystems, but the majority of them aren't related to removable media. 
udisks2 supports setting the UDISKS_AUTO variable to 0 on devices that
shouldn't be automounted, which means something like:

SUBSYSTEM!="block", GOTO="udisks_insecure_fs_end"
ENV{ID_FS_TYPE}=="hfs", ENV{UDISKS_AUTO}="0"
# repeat as necessary for anything else that shouldn't be automounted
LABEL="udisks_insecure_fs_end"

ought to be enough. So:

a) Does this seem like a good idea?
b) If so, is dealing with it via udev rules the right approach? This way 
seems desktop-agnostic
c) Where should it ship, and what should the process be for disabling it 
for people who need this functionality?

Long-term I'd love to see more work put into having FUSE support for 
these and leaving the in-kernel fs to stuff we know is trustworthy, but 
that's rather more work.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Reply via email to