Date:   Fri, 30 Oct 2020 11:03:32 -0500
From:   "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
To:     Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@...onical.com>
Cc:     "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
        Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Dmitry Kasatkin <dmitry.kasatkin@...il.com>,
        Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@...il.com>,
        Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
        OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@...l.parknet.co.jp>,
        Geoffrey Thomas <geofft@...reload.com>,
        Mrunal Patel <mpatel@...hat.com>,
        Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>, Alban Crequy <alban@...volk.io>,
        Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Stéphane Graber <stgraber@...ntu.com>,
        Lennart Poettering <lennart@...ttering.net>,
        smbarber@...omium.org, Phil Estes <estesp@...il.com>,
        Serge Hallyn <serge@...lyn.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@...gle.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-audit@...hat.com, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        selinux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/34] fs: idmapped mounts

On Fri, Oct 30, 2020 at 10:07:48AM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 11:37:23AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > First and foremost: A uid shift on write to a filesystem is a security
> > bug waiting to happen.  This is especially in the context of facilities
> > like iouring, that play very agressive games with how process context
> > makes it to  system calls.
> > 
> > The only reason containers were not immediately exploitable when iouring
> > was introduced is because the mechanisms are built so that even if
> > something escapes containment the security properties still apply.
> > Changes to the uid when writing to the filesystem does not have that
> > property.  The tiniest slip in containment will be a security issue.
> > 
> > This is not even the least bit theoretical.  I have seem reports of how
> > shitfs+overlayfs created a situation where anyone could read
> > /etc/shadow.
> 
> This bug was the result of a complex interaction with several
> contributing factors. It's fair to say that one component was overlayfs
> writing through an id-shifted mount, but the primary cause was related
> to how copy-up was done coupled with allowing unprivileged overlayfs
> mounts in a user ns. Checks that the mounter had access to the lower fs
> file were not done before copying data up, and so the file was copied up
> temporarily to the id shifted upperdir. Even though it was immediately
> removed, other factors made it possible for the user to get the file
> contents from the upperdir.
> 
> Regardless, I do think you raise a good point. We need to be wary of any
> place the kernel could open files through a shifted mount, especially
> when the open could be influenced by userspace.
> 
> Perhaps kernel file opens through shifted mounts should to be opt-in.
> I.e. unless a flag is passed, or a different open interface used, the
> open will fail if the dentry being opened is subject to id shifting.
> This way any kernel writes which would be subject to id shifting will
> only happen through code which as been written to take it into account.

For my use cases, it would be fine to require opt-in at original fs
mount time by init_user_ns admin.  I.e.
    mount -o allow_idmap /dev/mapper/whoozit /whatzit
I'm quite certain I would always be sharing a separate LV or loopback or
tmpfs.

-serge

Powered by blists - more mailing lists