linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] coredump: run the coredump helper using the same namespace as the dead process

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: <20121105201825.GM14789@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 5 Nov 2012 15:18:25 -0500
From:	Aristeu Rozanski <aris@...hat.com>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Linux Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] coredump: run the coredump helper using the same
 namespace as the dead process

On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 11:34:26AM -0800, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> I would argue that you very much need to define what it means to have a
> per container core dump at the same time as you argue this.
> 
> Nacked-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
> 
> Running in a namespace different than whoever set the core dump
> pattern/helper makes core dump helpers much more attackable.  With this
> patch and a little creativity I expect I can get root to write to
> whatever file I would like.  Since I also control the content of what is
> going into that file.... This design seems emintely exploitable.

Understood. Indeed this is bad design. Having it tied to the mount
namespace of the process setting the pattern/helper, therefore any
process crashing under the same mount namespace would use the same
pattern/helper? 

> Furthermore not all namespaces are pointed at by nsproxy, so even
> for it's original design this patch is buggy.

is it userns? I just assumed it wasn't there yet because it's being
worked on.

> I do think supporting a per container coredump setting makes a lot of
> sense but I do not think this patch is the way to do it.

I understand, thanks for the time reviewing it.


-- 
Aristeu

--
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/