writer: Reject empty xattr names #400
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Came out of a related discussion in ostree ostreedev/ostree#3346 (comment) Today we faithfully write this, and `fsck.erofs` doesn't seem to complain...but such a thing makes no sense so we shouldn't support it. Actually digging in more here...in practice the way xattrs work in Linux at least is they're restricted to starting with one of the standard prefixes like `security.` or `user.`; but enforcing/validating that is a whole other thing. For now let's just deny this edge case. Signed-off-by: Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org>
allisonkarlitskaya
approved these changes
Dec 2, 2024
The semantics for that today are that you get last-one-wins. We hit a bug related to this when fuzzing, see 2ef9e9b We could probably very safely change that to be an error? It'd make sense to me to do so. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Came out of a related discussion in ostree
ostreedev/ostree#3346 (comment)
Today we faithfully write this, and
fsck.erofsdoesn't seem to complain...but such a thing makes no sense so we shouldn't support it.Actually digging in more here...in practice the way xattrs work in Linux at least is they're restricted to starting with one of the standard prefixes like
security.oruser.; but enforcing/validating that is a whole other thing. For now let's just deny this edge case.