install corrupts files on eCryptfs filesystems

[sylvestre]

Reported downstream: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/coreutils-from/+bug/2158615

Copying a file with install inside an eCryptfs-encrypted directory produces a truncated/corrupted destination. GNU coreutils works fine on the same path.

Reproduction (inside an eCryptfs directory):

yes foo | dd of=test bs=4K count=16   # 64 KiB
install ./test ./test-install
cmp test test-install                 # differs

Seen on Ubuntu 26.04, amd64, kernel 7.0.

[oech3]

Cannot reproduce (even with 0.8.0). What config should I use at mount time?
Also how about cat file > out? cc @ysalmon

[oech3]

No problem with strace -e inject=splice:error=EINVAL:when=2 install test brk.

[ysalmon]

Cannot test right now because I have swapped out coreutils-from-uutils for coreutils-from-gnu. Is there an easy way I can run the uutils version separately ?

[HackingRepo]

@ysalmon you can via compiling https://github.com/uutils/coreutils, and you will get the binaries back not need the ubuntu package in target/debug/ folder

[oech3]

Or provide complete step to reproduce it from mount command.

[ysalmon]

mount says

/home/.ecryptfs/yann/.Private on /home/yann type ecryptfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,ecryptfs_fnek_sig=****,ecryptfs_sig=****,ecryptfs_cipher=aes,ecryptfs_key_bytes=16,ecryptfs_unlink_sigs) tmpfs on /run/user/1000 type tmpfs (rw,nosuid,nodev,relatime,size=3274808k,nr_inodes=818702,mode=700,uid=1000,gid=1000,inode64)

[ysalmon]

I can reproduce the bug with version 0.8.0 (the one in Ubuntu iirc), but not with 0.9.0.

[ysalmon]

Apparently, the first commit to not have the bug is f936e22.

[oech3]

OK. But I guess it is difficult to request Ubuntu to backport the patch due to confliction. Please ask Ubuntu to use GNU install as default set.
We can only support main branch. This issue can be closed as complete.

[ysalmon]

Or they could just upgrade to 0.9.0 ?

[oech3]

Also there is worth to investigate both of GNU 9.11 cat and uutils 0.8.0 cat with 1 MiB+ input.

[oech3]

Or they could just upgrade to 0.9.0 ?

It is difficult because Ubuntu is not a roling release Linux distribution. But no one stop replacing your private binaries by yourself.

[oech3]

@BAMF0 @julian-klode Would you exclude install from default set?

[ysalmon]

I checked out b6e4c45, did yes foo | dd of=test bs=4K count=1600 then cat test > test-gnu and /tmp/coreutils/target/debug/cat test > test-uutils. The hashes are good (not with install, as expected).