CheckTrailingGarbage was called even when "-passfile" was
used, which is stupid, and causes false positives:
https://github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs/issues/391
(false error "Received trailing garbage after the password"
when using -passfile in .bash_profile)
Instead of trying to improve the logic to handle that case
and make everything even more complicated, delete the function.
It is unclear if actually helps in some cases, and it definitely
harms as shown by the above bug report.
This adds support for gitignore-like wildcards and exclude patters in
reverse mode. It (somewhat) fixes#273: no regexp support, but the
syntax should be powerful enough to satisfy most needs.
Also, since adding a lot of --exclude options can be tedious, it adds
the --exclude-from option to read patterns from a file (or files).
Trezor support has been broken since Sept 2018
( https://github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs/issues/261 ).
Disable trezor.go by renaming to trezor.go.broken.
This keeps "dep" from having to pull in A LOT OF dependencies:
Before:
$ du -sh vendor/
49M vendor/
After:
$ du -sh vendor/
16M vendor/
This fixed the "Permission denied" bug, but still has the problem that
the directory may be replaced behind our back. Mitigated by the fact
that we skip the workaround when running as root with -allow_other.
https://github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs/issues/354
In the error case, buf was not restored to the original
capacity. Instead of truncating "buf" and restoring (or forgetting to restore)
later, introduce the "data" slice.
Fixes https://github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs/issues/356
For Linux, everything effectively stays the same. For both path-based and
fd-based Utimens() calls, we use unix.UtimesNanoAt(). To avoid introducing
a separate syscall wrapper for futimens() (as done in go-fuse, for example),
we instead use the /proc/self/fd - trick.
On macOS, this changes quite a lot:
* Path-based Utimens() calls were previously completely broken, since
unix.UtimensNanoAt() ignores the passed file descriptor. Note that this
cannot be fixed easily since there IS no appropriate syscall available on
macOS prior to High Sierra (10.13). We emulate this case by using
Fchdir() + setattrlist().
* Fd-based Utimens() calls were previously translated to f.GetAttr() (to
fill any empty parameters) and syscall.Futimes(), which does not does
support nanosecond precision. Both issues can be fixed by switching to
fsetattrlist().
Fixes https://github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs/issues/350
This should get rid of
Openat: O_NOFOLLOW missing: flags = 0x0
Fchmodat: adding missing AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW flag
sys_common_test.go:203: chmod on symlink should have failed, but did not. New mode=0333
UnmountErr: "[...]/057376762.mnt" was not found in MountInfo, cannot check for FD leak
and add some context to
--- FAIL: TestUtimesNano (0.00s)
matrix_test.go:628: no such file or directory
See https://github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs/pull/343#issuecomment-453888006
for full test output
The only call forwarded to loopbackFileSystem was Statfs,
which is trivial to implement.
Implement it and drop loopbackFileSystem, as having it carries the
risk that a coding error bypasses the usual encryption/decryption
chain.
Instead of manually adjusting the user after creating the symlink,
adjust effective permissions and let the kernel deal with it.
Related to https://github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs/issues/338.
Instead of manually adjusting the user and mode after creating the
device file, adjust effective permissions and let the kernel deal
with it.
Related to https://github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs/issues/338.
The current code has a risk of race-conditions, since we pass a path
containing "/" to Fchownat. We could fix this by opening a file descriptor,
however, this does not seem worth the effort. We also don't chown *.name files.
Make sure that the directory belongs to the correct owner before users
can access it. For directories with SUID/SGID mode, there is a risk of
race-conditions when files are created before the correct owner is set.
They will then inherit the wrong user and/or group.
See https://github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs/issues/327 for more details.
Reported by @slackner at https://github.com/rfjakob/gocryptfs/issues/327 :
Possible race-conditions between file creation and Fchownat
* Assume a system contains a gocryptfs mount as root user
with -allow_other
* As a regular user create a new file with mode containing
the SUID flag and write access for other users
* Before gocryptfs executes the Fchownat call, try to open
the file again, write some exploit code to it, and try to run it.
For a short time, the file is owned by root and has the SUID flag, so
this is pretty dangerous.
