[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20061108195059.0931837d.chris@friedhoff.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 19:50:59 +0100
From: Chris Friedhoff <chris@...edhoff.org>
To: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
KaiGai Kohei <kaigai@...gai.gr.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] security: introduce file posix caps
The patch from Nov 7 2006 with this fix configures, compiles, installs
and runns smotthly on 2.6.18.2.
I updated the page http://www.friedhoff.org/fscaps.html.
I also put the patch and this fix for download on the page and I put a
slackware-package with Kaigai Kohei's libcap/userspace tools on the
page.
I hope this will increase the interest and so testing of this patch.
Thanks Serge and Kaigai
Chris
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006 23:32:29 -0600
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com> wrote:
> Quoting Seth Arnold (seth.arnold@...e.de):
> > On Mon, Nov 06, 2006 at 09:45:50PM -0600, Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > #define CAP_AUDIT_CONTROL 30
> > >
> > > +#define CAP_NUMCAPS 31
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > +struct vfs_cap_data_struct {
> > > + __u32 version;
> > > + __u32 effective;
> > > + __u32 permitted;
> > > + __u32 inheritable;
> > > +};
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > +static int check_cap_sanity(struct vfs_cap_data_struct *cap)
> > > +{
> > > + int i;
> > > +
> > > + if (cap->version != _LINUX_CAPABILITY_VERSION)
> > > + return -EPERM;
> > > +
> > > + for (i=CAP_NUMCAPS; i<sizeof(cap->effective); i++) {
> > > + if (cap->effective & CAP_TO_MASK(i))
> > > + return -EPERM;
> > > + }
> > > + for (i=CAP_NUMCAPS; i<sizeof(cap->permitted); i++) {
> > > + if (cap->permitted & CAP_TO_MASK(i))
> > > + return -EPERM;
> > > + }
> > > + for (i=CAP_NUMCAPS; i<sizeof(cap->inheritable); i++) {
> > > + if (cap->inheritable & CAP_TO_MASK(i))
> > > + return -EPERM;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> >
> > for (i=31; i<4; i++) ...
> >
> > I'm not sure this checks what you think it checks? :)
>
> Thanks again for catching this. Here is the obvious patch. Hopefully
> I have it right this time.
>
> >From b91c46589b13bab78ddf431245a7ecbd59bcf2fd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Serge E. Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com>
> Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 23:16:06 -0600
> Subject: [PATCH 1/1] fscaps: fix cap sanity check
>
> When checking for valid capabilities on files, we want to
> make sure that unused bits are not set. Fix the calculation
> of the highest bit checked.
>
> Signed-off-by: Serge E. Hallyn <serue@...ibm.com>
> ---
> security/commoncap.c | 6 +++---
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/security/commoncap.c b/security/commoncap.c
> index 6a0d033..6f5e46c 100644
> --- a/security/commoncap.c
> +++ b/security/commoncap.c
> @@ -133,15 +133,15 @@ static int check_cap_sanity(struct vfs_c
> if (cap->version != _LINUX_CAPABILITY_VERSION)
> return -EPERM;
>
> - for (i=CAP_NUMCAPS; i<sizeof(cap->effective); i++) {
> + for (i=CAP_NUMCAPS; i<8*sizeof(cap->effective); i++) {
> if (cap->effective & CAP_TO_MASK(i))
> return -EPERM;
> }
> - for (i=CAP_NUMCAPS; i<sizeof(cap->permitted); i++) {
> + for (i=CAP_NUMCAPS; i<8*sizeof(cap->permitted); i++) {
> if (cap->permitted & CAP_TO_MASK(i))
> return -EPERM;
> }
> - for (i=CAP_NUMCAPS; i<sizeof(cap->inheritable); i++) {
> + for (i=CAP_NUMCAPS; i<8*sizeof(cap->inheritable); i++) {
> if (cap->inheritable & CAP_TO_MASK(i))
> return -EPERM;
> }
> --
> 1.4.3.3
>
--------------------
Chris Friedhoff
chris@...edhoff.org
-
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