[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F10355F.5000805@canonical.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 14:45:03 +0100
From: John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
CC: Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, keescook@...omium.org,
serge.hallyn@...onical.com, coreyb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
pmoore@...hat.com, eparis@...hat.com, djm@...drot.org,
segoon@...nwall.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, jmorris@...ei.org,
scarybeasts@...il.com, avi@...hat.com, penberg@...helsinki.fi,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, luto@....EDU, mingo@...e.hu,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, khilman@...com, borislav.petkov@....com,
amwang@...hat.com, oleg@...hat.com, ak@...ux.intel.com,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, gregkh@...e.de, dhowells@...hat.com,
daniel.lezcano@...e.fr, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, olofj@...omium.org,
mhalcrow@...gle.com, dlaor@...hat.com, corbet@....net,
alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add PR_{GET,SET}_NO_NEW_PRIVS to prevent execve from
granting privs
On 01/13/2012 03:12 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> With this set, a lot of dangerous operations (chroot, unshare, etc)
> become a lot less dangerous because there is no possibility of
> subverting privileged binaries.
>
> This patch completely breaks apparmor. Someone who understands (and
> uses) apparmor should fix it or at least give me a hint.
>
This should fix apparmor
---
>From b4d142f1a81d252ac2a72587841e7b430190a889 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 14:20:47 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] Fix apparmor for PR_{GET,SET}_NO_NEW_PRIV
Signed-off-by: John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>
---
security/apparmor/domain.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/security/apparmor/domain.c b/security/apparmor/domain.c
index 7f480b7..7316d77 100644
--- a/security/apparmor/domain.c
+++ b/security/apparmor/domain.c
@@ -360,9 +360,6 @@ int apparmor_bprm_set_creds(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
if (bprm->cred_prepared)
return 0;
- /* XXX: someone who understands apparmor needs to fix this. */
- BUG_ON(bprm->unsafe & LSM_UNSAFE_NO_NEW_PRIVS);
-
cxt = bprm->cred->security;
BUG_ON(!cxt);
@@ -398,6 +395,11 @@ int apparmor_bprm_set_creds(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
new_profile = find_attach(ns, &ns->base.profiles, name);
if (!new_profile)
goto cleanup;
+ /*
+ * NOTE: Domain transitions from unconfined are allowed
+ * even when no_new_privs is set because this aways results
+ * in a further reduction of permissions.
+ */
goto apply;
}
@@ -458,6 +460,16 @@ int apparmor_bprm_set_creds(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
/* fail exec */
error = -EACCES;
+ /*
+ * Policy has specified a domain transition, if no_new_privs then
+ * fail the exec.
+ */
+ if (bprm->unsafe & LSM_UNSAFE_NO_NEW_PRIVS) {
+ aa_put_profile(new_profile);
+ error = -EPERM;
+ goto cleanup;
+ }
+
if (!new_profile)
goto audit;
@@ -612,6 +624,14 @@ int aa_change_hat(const char *hats[], int count, u64 token, bool permtest)
const char *target = NULL, *info = NULL;
int error = 0;
+ /*
+ * Fail explicitly requested domain transitions if no_new_privs.
+ * There is no exception for unconfined as change_hat is not
+ * available.
+ */
+ if (current->no_new_privs)
+ return -EPERM;
+
/* released below */
cred = get_current_cred();
cxt = cred->security;
@@ -753,6 +773,18 @@ int aa_change_profile(const char *ns_name, const char *hname, bool onexec,
cxt = cred->security;
profile = aa_cred_profile(cred);
+ /*
+ * Fail explicitly requested domain transitions if no_new_privs
+ * and not unconfined.
+ * Domain transitions from unconfined are allowed even when
+ * no_new_privs is set because this aways results in a reduction
+ * of permissions.
+ */
+ if (current->no_new_privs && !unconfined(profile)) {
+ put_cred(cred);
+ return -EPERM;
+ }
+
if (ns_name) {
/* released below */
ns = aa_find_namespace(profile->ns, ns_name);
--
1.7.7.3
--
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