linux-kernel - Re: symlinks with permissions (fwd)

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20091028211040.GA4182@elf.ucw.cz>
Date:	Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:10:40 +0100
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: symlinks with permissions (fwd)

(I forgot to cc the list)

From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: symlinks with permissions
X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health.

Hi!

> >> > 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.
> >> 
> >> Openly if you actually have permission to open the file again.  The actual
> >> permissions on the file should not be ignored.
> >
> > The actual permissions of the file are not ignored, but permissions of
> > the containing directory _are_. If there's 666 file in 700 directory,
> > you can reopen it read-write, in violation of directory's 700
> > permissions.
> 
> I can see how all of this can come as a surprise.  However I don't see
> how any coder who is taking security seriously and being paranoid about
> security would actually write code that would have a problem with this.
> 
> Do you know of any cases where this difference matters in practice?

Actually yes, see the bugtraq post. guest was able to write to my file
when I expected that file to be protected.

According to the bugtraq discussion, people expect directory
permissions to work. /proc currently breaks that. I bet there are few
systems in the wild that have permissions set up like that, but it is
not easy to actually find such systems.

Better fix it...
								Pavel


-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

----- End forwarded message -----

-- 
(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/