[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091025093604.GA1501@ucw.cz>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 10:36:04 +0100
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@...ibm.com>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
jamie@...reable.org
Subject: Re: symlinks with permissions
On Mon 2009-10-26 13:57:49, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 18:46 +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > That's what I'd think as well but it does not as I've just learned and
> > tested :) proc_pid_follow_link actually directly gives a dentry of the
> > target file without checking permissions on the way.
It is weider. That symlink even has permissions. Those are not
checked, either.
> I seem to remember that is deliberate, the point being that a symlink
> in /proc/*/fd/ may contain a path that refers to a private namespace.
Well, it is unexpected and mild security hole.
Part of the problem is that even if you have read-only
filedescriptor, you can upgrade it to read-write, even if path is
inaccessible to you.
So if someone passes you read-only filedescriptor, you can still write
to it.
Pavel
--
(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