From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E7FC6381E
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:03:33 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 44F211783C
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:03:33 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [212.186.127.180])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 9BB941782E
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:03:32 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
 by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6346743B69
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:03:32 +0100 (CET)
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Stoiko Ivanov <s.ivanov@proxmox.com>
References: <20201124185547.8832-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Message-ID: <3a16ea99-e4fd-429c-935b-9b19e5913cac@proxmox.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:03:31 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:83.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/83.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20201124185547.8832-1-s.ivanov@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results:  0
 AWL -0.081 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED        -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
 medium trust
 SPF_HELO_NONE           0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
 SPF_PASS               -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
 URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See
 http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more
 information. [osd.pm, proxmox.com]
Subject: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH manager 0/2] fix small glitch in OSD
 destruction due to tainting
X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, 
 <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:03:33 -0000

On 24.11.20 19:55, Stoiko Ivanov wrote:
> Saw the forum thread's subject [0]  and was reminded of the issue with the LIO
> target provider recently [1].
> 
> Depending on feedback I might slowly be inclined to blindly untaint in
> run_command again?
> 

now that we cacthed most stuff already? ^^ If we can do so efficiently it can be OK
for me.

> 
> [0] https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/insecure-dependency-in-exec-during-osd-destroy.79574/
> [1] https://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/2020-October/045524.html
> 
> Stoiko Ivanov (2):
>   api2: osd destroy: fix error function
>   api2: osd destroy: untaint device before pvremove
> 
>  PVE/API2/Ceph/OSD.pm | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 



applied, thanks!