linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] user namespace: make signal.c respect user namespaces (v4)

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]

Date:	Wed, 9 Nov 2011 08:18:53 -0600
From:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Serge Hallyn <serge@...lyn.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, oleg@...hat.com,
	richard@....at, ebiederm@...ssion.com, dhowells@...hat.com,
	eparis@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] user namespace: make signal.c respect user
 namespaces (v4)

Quoting Andrew Morton (akpm@...ux-foundation.org):
> On Fri,  4 Nov 2011 22:24:37 +0000
> Serge Hallyn <serge@...lyn.com> wrote:
> 
> > +static inline void fixup_uid(struct siginfo *info, struct task_struct *t)
> > +{
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_USER_NS
> > +	if (current_user_ns() == task_cred_xxx(t, user_ns))
> > +#endif
> > +		return;
> > +
> > +	if (SI_FROMKERNEL(info))
> > +		return;
> > +
> > +	info->si_uid = user_ns_map_uid(task_cred_xxx(t, user_ns),
> > +					current_cred(), info->si_uid);
> > +}
> 
> err, this function is a no-op if CONFIG_USER_NS=n.  If that was
> intentional then why on earth do this in such a weird fashion?  If

(I didn't write it, but)  I think the assumption was that the compiler
would optimize it all away if !CONFIG_USER_NS, and in this way the
call site didn't need to be obscured with the #ifdef.  Is there a way
that's better?  Would you prefer something like:

+#ifdef CONFIG_USER_NS
+static inline void fixup_uid(struct siginfo *info, struct task_struct *t)
+{
+	if (current_user_ns() == task_cred_xxx(t, user_ns))
+		return;
+
+	if (SI_FROMKERNEL(info))
+		return;
+
+	info->si_uid = user_ns_map_uid(task_cred_xxx(t, user_ns),
+					current_cred(), info->si_uid);
+}
+#else
+static inline void fixup_uid(struct siginfo *info, struct task_struct *t)
+{
+		return;
+}
+#endif

?  It's less sneaky at least.

> unintentional then it makes me wonder how well tested all this was with
> CONFIG_USER_NS=n?
> 
> I vaguely remember that I've forgotten how all this stuff works.  Some
> additional review input would be nice (cough-oleg-cough).
> 
--
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/