linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: allow persistent reservations without CAP_SYS

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:	Tue, 12 Jun 2012 17:21:09 +0100
From:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To:	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, axboe@...nel.dk,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: allow persistent reservations without
 CAP_SYS_RAWIO

On Tue, 2012-06-12 at 18:08 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Persistent reservations commands cannot be issued right now without
> giving CAP_SYS_RAWIO to the process who wishes to send them.  This
> is a bit heavy-handed, allow these two commands.

Why is this heavy handed?  If you remove CAP_SYS_RAWIO, any userspace
process can send these, which would allow any user to completely disrupt
a SAN by injecting spurious reservations ... that doesn't look to be
terribly safe for an operating system running in a data centre.

James
 

--
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/