linux-kernel - Re: unprivileged mounts git tree

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:	Fri, 5 Sep 2008 10:31:34 -0500
From:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	ebiederm@...ssion.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	hch@...radead.org, viro@...IV.linux.org.uk,
	linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: unprivileged mounts git tree

Quoting Miklos Szeredi (miklos@...redi.hu):
> On Thu, 04 Sep 2008, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > On Thu, 4 Sep 2008, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > Are you going to revert the change forcing CL_SLAVE for
> > > !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN)?  I don't think we want that - I think that
> > > *within* a set of user mounts, propagation should be safe, right?
> > > 
> > > Will you be able to do this soon?  If not, should we just do the part
> > > returning -EPERM when turning a shared mount into a user mount? 
> > 
> > OK, let's do that first and the tricky part (propagation vs. user
> > mounts) later.  Will push after I've tested it.
> 
> Here it is:
> 
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mszeredi/vfs.git unprivileged-mounts
> 
> I don't know what's next, this patchset has been in and out of -mm for
> as long as I can remember, but it hasn't generated much interest
> outside the two of us :)
> 
> I do think this is an important feature though, even if not as sexy as
> some other things.
> 
> Al?  Is there any chance of this making it to 2.6.28?
> 
> Thanks,
> Miklos

Ok I should take the time to properly add these to ltp, but for now here
is the result of 15-minutes of playing around with shell scripts to do
some basic testing.

Run usermounts_root.sh as root first, then usermounts_user as a user.
Cleanup for the usermounts_root.sh side-effects is not done.

Miklos, do you have better-thought-out or more complete testcases?

-serge

=====================================================================
FILE usermounts_root.sh
=====================================================================
#!/bin/sh
MMOUNTDIR=/usr/src/mmount-0.3
MOUNT=${MMOUNTDIR}/mmount
UMOUNT=${MMOUNTIDR}/ummount

mkdir -p /mnt/shared /mnt/slave /mnt/private
mkdir /mnt/shared/d /mnt/slave/d /mnt/private/d

touch /mnt/shared/a
touch /mnt/slave/b
touch /mnt/private/c

mount --bind /mnt/shared /mnt/shared
mount --make-rshared /mnt/shared
mount --bind /mnt/shared /mnt/slave
mount --make-rslave /mnt/slave
=====================================================================


=====================================================================
FILE usermounts_user.sh
=====================================================================
#!/bin/sh
MMOUNTDIR=/usr/src/mmount-0.3
MOUNT=${MMOUNTDIR}/mmount
UMOUNT=${MMOUNTDIR}/ummount

mkdir t1

# user bind a root shared mount.  Should fail -EPERM.

$MOUNT --bind /mnt/shared t1
rc=$?
if [ $rc -eq 0 ]; then
	echo "FAIL: succeeded in user-binding a root-shared dir"
	exit 1
fi
echo "PASS: first test passed (refused to user-bind a root-shared dir"

# user bind a root shared mount, then bind into there.  Make sure
# that the two binds work, and the second is not propagated to the
# first

$MOUNT --bind /mnt/slave t1
$MOUNT --bind /mnt/private t1/d
if [ ! -f t1/d/c ]; then
	echo "failed mounting private under slave/d"
	exit 1
fi
if [ -f /mnt/slave/d/c ]; then
	echo "user mount of private under slave/d was propagated to /mnt/slave!"
	exit 1
fi
if [ -f /mnt/shared/d/c ]; then
	echo "user mount of private under slave/d was propagated to /mnt/shared!"
	exit 1
fi

ret=0
$UMOUNT t1/d || ret=1
$UMOUNT t1 || ret=1
if [ $ret -eq 1 ]; then
	echo "user umount refused in second test"
	exit 1
fi
if [ -f t1/a ]; then
	echo "user umount failed in second test"
	exit 1
fi

rmdir t1

echo "PASS: second test passed (user-mounts of root-slave and root-private dirs)"

# bind mount /etc/shadow.  First make sure that we cannot read
# /etc/shadow and can read the target.  Then make sure that we
# can no longer read the target after the bind mount.

cat /etc/shadow >> /dev/null
rc=$?
if [ $rc -eq 0 ]; then
	echo "test 3: Oh no, I'm able to read /etc/shadow!"
	exit 1
fi
echo ab > t1
cat t1 >> /dev/null
rc=$?
if [ $rc -ne 0 ]; then
	echo "test 3: Odd, couldn't read my own file."
	exit 1
fi
$MOUNT --bind /etc/shadow t1
cat t1 >> /dev/null
rc=$?
if [ $rc -eq 0 ]; then
	echo "test 3: bind mount of /etc/shadow gave me read access!"
	exit 1
fi
$UMOUNT t1
rm t1

echo "PASS: third test passed (user mount of file)"

echo "all tests succeeded"
exit 0
=====================================================================
--
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/