linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 06/11] rlimits: do security check under task

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: <20100513155626.8d1fe293.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 13 May 2010 15:56:26 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Cc:	adobriyan@...il.com, nhorman@...driver.com, oleg@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jirislaby@...il.com,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/11] rlimits: do security check under task_lock

On Mon, 10 May 2010 20:00:46 +0200
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz> wrote:

> Do security_task_setrlimit under task_lock. Other tasks may
> change limits under our hands while we are checking limits
> inside the function. From now on, they can't.
>
> ...
>
> --- a/kernel/sys.c
> +++ b/kernel/sys.c
> @@ -1277,7 +1277,7 @@ int do_setrlimit(struct task_struct *tsk, unsigned int resource,
>  		struct rlimit *new_rlim)
>  {
>  	struct rlimit *old_rlim;
> -	int retval;
> +	int retval = 0;
>  
>  	if (resource >= RLIM_NLIMITS)
>  		return -EINVAL;
> @@ -1293,10 +1293,6 @@ int do_setrlimit(struct task_struct *tsk, unsigned int resource,
>  		goto out;
>  	}
>  
> -	retval = security_task_setrlimit(tsk, resource, new_rlim);
> -	if (retval)
> -		goto out;
> -
>  	if (resource == RLIMIT_CPU && new_rlim->rlim_cur == 0) {
>  		/*
>  		 * The caller is asking for an immediate RLIMIT_CPU
> @@ -1309,11 +1305,13 @@ int do_setrlimit(struct task_struct *tsk, unsigned int resource,
>  
>  	old_rlim = tsk->signal->rlim + resource;
>  	task_lock(tsk->group_leader);
> -	if ((new_rlim->rlim_max <= old_rlim->rlim_max) ||
> -				capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE))
> -		*old_rlim = *new_rlim;
> -	else
> +	if ((new_rlim->rlim_max > old_rlim->rlim_max) &&
> +				!capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE))
>  		retval = -EPERM;
> +	if (!retval)
> +		retval = security_task_setrlimit(tsk, resource, new_rlim);
> +	if (!retval)
> +		*old_rlim = *new_rlim;
>  	task_unlock(tsk->group_leader);
>  
>  	if (retval || resource != RLIMIT_CPU)

Yikes, so the locking around all that selinux code becomes even more
brutal.  How much rope are you tying around the selinux developers'
hands here?


--
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/