linux-kernel - Re: DoS with unprivileged mounts

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 15 Aug 2013 16:23:45 -0500
From:	Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
To:	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>
Cc:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Linux-Fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: DoS with unprivileged mounts

On 08/14/2013 12:42:19 PM, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> There's a simple and effective way to prevent unlink(2) and rename(2)
> from operating on any file or directory by simply mounting something
> on it.  In any mount instance in any namespace.
> 
> Was this considered in the unprivileged mount design?
> 
> The solution is also theoretically simple: mounts in unpriv namespaces
> are marked "volatile" and are dissolved on an unlink type operation.
> 
> Such volatile mounts would be useful in general too.

Would that "anonymous inode" thing that wandered by recently help,  
letting umount move the mount to one side so you could keep the mount  
point as the root of your per-process hierarchy but not have it glued  
to other people's namespaces?

Rob--
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/