linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] fs: add O

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:	Mon, 3 Nov 2014 17:37:37 +0000
From:	David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>
To:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Meredydd Luff <meredydd@...atehouse.org>,
	Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
	Jorge Lucangeli Obes <jorgelo@...gle.com>,
	Ricky Zhou <rickyz@...gle.com>,
	Lee Campbell <leecam@...gle.com>,
	Julien Tinnes <jln@...gle.com>,
	Mike Depinet <mdepinet@...gle.com>,
	James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
	Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] fs: add O_BENEATH flag to openat(2)

On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 7:20 AM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 11:48:23AM +0000, David Drysdale wrote:
>>> Add a new O_BENEATH flag for openat(2) which restricts the
>>> provided path, rejecting (with -EACCES) paths that are not beneath
>>> the provided dfd.  In particular, reject:
>>>  - paths that contain .. components
>>>  - paths that begin with /
>>>  - symlinks that have paths as above.
>>
>> Yecch...  The degree of usefulness aside (and I'm not convinced that it
>> is non-zero),
>
> This is extremely useful in conjunction with seccomp.

Yes, that was my understanding of how the Chrome[OS] folk wanted
to use it.

>> WTF pass one bit out of nameidata->flags in a separate argument?

I'll shift to using nd->flags; not sure what I was thinking of there.

(It *might* have made more sense in the full patchset this was extracted
from but it certainly doesn't look sensible in this narrower context.)

>> Through the mutual recursion, no less...  And then you are not even attempting
>> to detect symlinks that are not followed by interpretation of _any_ pathname.
>
> How many symlinks like that are there?  Is there anything except
> nd_jump_link users?  All of those are in /proc.  Arguably O_BENEATH
> should prevent traversal of all of those links.
>
> --Andy

On a quick search, the 2 users of nd_jump_link (namely proc_pid_follow_link
and proc_ns_follow_link) seem to be the only implementations of
inode_operations->follow_link that don't just call nd_set_link().  So
disallowing that for O_BENEATH might give sensible behaviour.
--
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/