lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Wed, 21 May 2008 22:41:37 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	"Andrew G. Morgan" <morgan@...nel.org>
Cc:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Security Modules List 
	<linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] security: protect legacy apps from insufficient
 privilege

On Wed, 21 May 2008 08:50:25 -0700 "Andrew G. Morgan" <morgan@...nel.org> wrote:

> +	CAP_FOR_EACH_U32(i) {
> +		if (i >= tocopy) {
> +			/*
> +			 * Legacy capability sets have no upper bits
> +			 */
> +			bprm->cap_post_exec_permitted.cap[i] = 0;
> +		} else {
> +			__u32 value_cpu;
> +			/*
> +			 * pP' = (X & fP) | (pI & fI)
> +			 */
> +			value_cpu = le32_to_cpu(caps->data[i].permitted);
> +			bprm->cap_post_exec_permitted.cap[i] = (
> +					current->cap_bset.cap[i] & value_cpu
> +				) | (
> +					current->cap_inheritable.cap[i] &
> +					le32_to_cpu(caps->data[i].inheritable)
> +				);
> +			if (value_cpu &
> +			    ~bprm->cap_post_exec_permitted.cap[i]) {
> +				/*
> +				 * insufficient to execute correctly
> +				 */
> +				ret = -EPERM;
> +			}
> +		}
>  	}

That makes my eyes say ow.  The 80-col thing is a pain.

With a judiciously placed `continue' we can do this:

	CAP_FOR_EACH_U32(i) {
		__u32 value_cpu;

		if (i >= tocopy) {
			/*
			 * Legacy capability sets have no upper bits
			 */
			bprm->cap_post_exec_permitted.cap[i] = 0;
			continue;
		}
		/*
		 * pP' = (X & fP) | (pI & fI)
		 */
		value_cpu = le32_to_cpu(caps->data[i].permitted);
		bprm->cap_post_exec_permitted.cap[i] =
			(current->cap_bset.cap[i] & value_cpu) |
			(current->cap_inheritable.cap[i] &
				le32_to_cpu(caps->data[i].inheritable));
		if (value_cpu & ~bprm->cap_post_exec_permitted.cap[i]) {
			/*
			 * insufficient to execute correctly
			 */
			ret = -EPERM;
		}
	}

OK?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ