linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v1 2/3] vm: use new has_capability

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]

Message-Id: <1225310227.23736.31.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date:	Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:57:07 -0400
From:	Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>
To:	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, selinux@...ho.nsa.gov,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, jmorris@...eil.org,
	serue@...ibm.com, morgan@...nel.org, casey@...aufler-ca.com,
	esandeen@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v1 2/3] vm: use new has_capability_noaudit

On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 15:15 -0400, Stephen Smalley wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 15:06 -0400, Eric Paris wrote:
> > The oomkiller calculations make decisions based on capabilities.  Since
> > these are not security decisions and LSMs should not record if they fall
> > the request they should use the new has_capability_noaudit() interface so
> > the denials will not be recorded.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>
> > ---
> > 
> >  fs/proc/base.c |    2 +-
> >  mm/oom_kill.c  |    6 +++---
> >  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c
> > index 486cf3f..ef83e81 100644
> > --- a/fs/proc/base.c
> > +++ b/fs/proc/base.c
> > @@ -1020,7 +1020,7 @@ static ssize_t oom_adjust_write(struct file *file, const char __user *buf,
> >  	task = get_proc_task(file->f_path.dentry->d_inode);
> >  	if (!task)
> >  		return -ESRCH;
> > -	if (oom_adjust < task->oomkilladj && !capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE)) {
> > +	if (oom_adjust < task->oomkilladj && !has_capability_noaudit(current, CAP_SYS_RESOURCE)) {
> 
> This one looks like an actual permission check to see whether the
> current task is authorized to modify this value (by writing to some proc
> node).  Which should be audited.  Unlike the others, where they are
> checking whether some other task has a capability in order to help
> decide priorities for the OOM killer.

Will be fixed in -v2

--
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/