| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 16:18:27 +0200 From: Pavel Machek <pavel@...e.cz> To: Markku Savela <msa@...h.iki.fi> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: Frustrated with capabilities.. On Wed 2008-08-27 12:31:10, Markku Savela wrote: > I just want to run an exectable with limited capabilities and assumed > the following approach would work fine: > > 1) fork process > 2) in child > > 2.1 set current capabilities (eip) using cap_set_proc > 2.2 execve the executable. > > But it frigging does not work! Just before the execve, the result of > cap_to_text is > > = cap_net_bind_service+eip > > but, in the execve executable, the result is suddenly > > = cap_net_bind_service+i > > Why does the execve clear the effective and permitted capabities, > against my clear instructions? (I also have the prctl KEEP_CAPS set, > though in this case it should be irrelevant). > > - The kernel is from ubuntu distro, 2.6.24. > > - the executable *does* *not* have any setuid/setgid bits > > - the upcoming file capabities will not be any help, because I will > need to start the same executable with different capabilities > depending on context. Yes, you need upcoming filesystem capabilities. Binary may not inherit capabilities unless filesystem flags permit that. -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- 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