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 DFCF6908E
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 08:15:29 +0100 (CET)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C18632891C
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 08:15:29 +0100 (CET)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
 [94.136.29.106])
 (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
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 08:15:28 +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 57BE843B7C
 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Thu, 17 Nov 2022 08:15:28 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <bd61edd5-de05-496c-8676-7213f249dbc8@proxmox.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2022 08:15:27 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:107.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/107.0
Content-Language: en-GB
To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>,
 Leo Nunner <l.nunner@proxmox.com>
References: <20221116173430.257506-1-l.nunner@proxmox.com>
 <20221116173430.257506-3-l.nunner@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20221116173430.257506-3-l.nunner@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: =?UTF-8?Q?0=0A=09?=AWL -0.031 Adjusted
 score from AWL reputation of From: =?UTF-8?Q?address=0A=09?=BAYES_00 -1.9
 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
 KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict
 =?UTF-8?Q?Alignment=0A=09?=SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an
 SPF =?UTF-8?Q?Record=0A=09?=SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
Subject: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH v2 qemu-server 1/1] fix #4321: properly
 check cloud-init drive permissions
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: Thu, 17 Nov 2022 07:15:29 -0000

Am 16/11/2022 um 18:34 schrieb Leo Nunner:
> The process for editing Cloud-init drives checked for inconsistent
> permissions: for adding, the VM.Config.Disk permission was needed, while
> the VM.Config.CDROM permission was needed to remove a drive. The regex
> in drive_is_cloudinit needed to be adapted since the drive names have
> different formats before/after they are actually generated.
> 
> Due to the regex letting names fall through before, Cloud-init drives
> were being checked as disks, even though they are actually treated as
> CDROM drives. Due to this, it makes more sense to check for
> VM.Config.CDROM instead, while also requiring VM.Config.Cloudinit, since
> generating a Cloud-init drive already generates default values that are
> passed to the VM.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Leo Nunner <l.nunner@proxmox.com>
> ---
>  PVE/API2/Qemu.pm        | 6 ++++--
>  PVE/QemuServer/Drive.pm | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
>

applied, thanks!