[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140630163233.GC10375@google.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 17:32:33 +0100
From: David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Meredydd Luff <meredydd@...atehouse.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] man-pages: cap_rights_limit.2: limit FD rights for
Capsicum
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 09:06:41AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 8:35 AM, David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 07:53:57AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 3:28 AM, David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com> wrote:
> >> > Signed-off-by: David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>
> >> > ---
> >> > man2/cap_rights_limit.2 | 171 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> > 1 file changed, 171 insertions(+)
> >> > create mode 100644 man2/cap_rights_limit.2
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/man2/cap_rights_limit.2 b/man2/cap_rights_limit.2
> >> > new file mode 100644
> >> > index 000000000000..3484ee1076aa
> >> > --- /dev/null
> >> > +++ b/man2/cap_rights_limit.2
> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,171 @@
> >> > +.\"
> >> > +.\" Copyright (c) 2008-2010 Robert N. M. Watson
> >> > +.\" Copyright (c) 2012-2013 The FreeBSD Foundation
> >> > +.\" Copyright (c) 2013-2014 Google, Inc.
> >> > +.\" All rights reserved.
> >> > +.\"
> >> > +.\" %%%LICENSE_START(BSD_2_CLAUSE)
> >> > +.\" Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
> >> > +.\" modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
> >> > +.\" are met:
> >> > +.\" 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
> >> > +.\" notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
> >> > +.\" 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
> >> > +.\" notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
> >> > +.\" documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
> >> > +.\"
> >> > +.\" THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND
> >> > +.\" ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
> >> > +.\" IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
> >> > +.\" ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE
> >> > +.\" FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
> >> > +.\" DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS
> >> > +.\" OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
> >> > +.\" HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT
> >> > +.\" LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
> >> > +.\" OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
> >> > +.\" SUCH DAMAGE.
> >> > +.\" %%%LICENSE_END
> >> > +.\"
> >> > +.TH CAP_RIGHTS_LIMIT 2 2014-05-07 "Linux" "Linux Programmer's Manual"
> >> > +.SH NAME
> >> > +cap_rights_limit \- limit Capsicum capability rights
> >> > +.SH SYNOPSIS
> >> > +.nf
> >> > +.B #include <sys/capsicum.h>
> >> > +.sp
> >> > +.BI "int cap_rights_limit(int " fd ", const struct cap_rights *" rights ,
> >> > +.BI " unsigned int " fcntls ,
> >> > +.BI " int " nioctls ", unsigned int *" ioctls );
> >>
> >> Am I missing the docs for struct cap_rights somewhere?
> >
> > There's a little bit of discussion in rights.7 (mail 3/5 of the
> > man-pages set), but there isn't a structure description.
> >
> > I was trying to keep the structure opaque to userspace, which would
> > be expected to manipulate the rights with various utility functions
> > rather than directly.
> >
> > But I now realize this leaves a gap -- the description of this syscall
> > doesn't include a full description of its ABI.
> >
> > So I'll add in a description of the structure to this page -- basically:
> >
> > struct cap_rights {
> > __u64 cr_rights[2];
> > };
> >
> > with a slightly complicated scheme to encode rights into the bitmask
> > array. (The encoding scheme is taken from the FreeBSD implementation,
> > which I've tried to stick to unless there's good reason to change.)
>
> How does extensibility work? For example, what happens when someone
> needs to add a new right for whatever reason and they fall off the end
> of the list?
>
> Linux so-called capabilities have done this a few times, resulting in
> a giant mess.
>
> --Andy
The rights encoding scheme is supposed to cope with extensions, so let me
have a go at explaining it.
The size of the array in the structure can potentially change in future,
so a less abbreviated version is:
#define CAP_RIGHTS_VERSION_00 0
#define CAP_RIGHTS_VERSION_01 1
#define CAP_RIGHTS_VERSION_02 2
#define CAP_RIGHTS_VERSION_03 3
#define CAP_RIGHTS_VERSION CAP_RIGHTS_VERSION_00
struct cap_rights {
uint64_t cr_rights[CAP_RIGHTS_VERSION + 2];
};
The encoding rules are then:
- There are between 2 and 5 entries in the array.
- The number of entries in the array is indicated by the top 2 bits of
cr_rights[0] (as array size minus 2); this allows for future
expansion (up to 285 distinct rights):
0b00 = 2 entries
0b01 = 3 entries
0b10 = 4 entries
0b11 = 5 entries
- The top 2 bits of cr_rights[i] are 0b00 for i>0.
- The next 5 bits of each array entry indicate its position in the
array:
0b00001 for cr_rights[0]
0b00010 for cr_rights[1]
0b00100 for cr_rights[2]
0b01000 for cr_rights[3]
0b10000 for cr_rights[4]
- The remaining 57 bits of each entry are used to hold rights values,
so the current structure can hold 114 rights, and the maximum is
285.
So a future kernel (with an expanded array) can cope with an old binary
(that uses a narrow array) by reading the first u64 from the structure,
and using the top 2 bits to figure out how much more memory to copy
from userspace. Slightly inefficient, but I wouldn't expect rights
setting to be a performance critical operation.
Of course, we can deviate from the FreeBSD implementation details if
we want to -- these details are deliberately hidden from userspace
programs in the rights-manipulation library functions, so a different
implementation under the covers wouldn't affect Capsicum-using
applications. But I figured it's best to stay close unless there's
a good reason to diverge.
--
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