linux-kernel - Re: user ns: arbitrary module loading

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:	Sat, 2 Mar 2013 18:57:00 -0600
From:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
To:	Kees Cook <keescook@...gle.com>
Cc:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>,
	Brad Spengler <spender@...ecurity.net>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: user ns: arbitrary module loading

Quoting Kees Cook (keescook@...gle.com):
> The rearranging done for user ns has resulted in allowing arbitrary
> kernel module loading[1] (i.e. re-introducing a form of CVE-2011-1019)
> by what is assumed to be an unprivileged process.
> 
> At present, it does look to require at least CAP_SETUID along the way
> to set up the uidmap (but things like the setuid helper newuidmap
> might soon start providing such a thing by default).
> 
> It might be worth examining GRKERNSEC_MODHARDEN in grsecurity, which
> examines module symbols to verify that request_module() for a
> filesystem only loads a module that defines "register_filesystem"
> (among other things).
> 
> -Kees
> 
> [1] https://twitter.com/grsecurity/status/307473816672665600

So the concern is root in a child user namespace doing

	mount -t randomfs <...>

in which case do_new_mount() checks ns_capable(), not capable(),
before trying to load a module for randomfs.

As well as (secondly) the fact that there is no enforcement on
the format of the module names (i.e. fs-*).

Kees, from what I've seen the GRKERNSEC_MODHARDEN won't be acceptable.
At least Eric Paris is strongly against it.  But how about if we
add a check for 'current_user_ns() == &init_user_ns' at that place
instead?

Eric Biederman, do you have any objections to that?

thanks,
-serge
--
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/