linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] kmod - add call_usermodehelper

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: <87y4qy7wci.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
Date:	Tue, 25 Nov 2014 16:23:57 -0600
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Ian Kent <ikent@...hat.com>,
	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	Stanislav Kinsbursky <skinsbursky@...allels.com>,
	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@...hat.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/4] kmod - add call_usermodehelper_ns() helper

Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> writes:

> On 11/25, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>>
>> Let me first apologize, I didn't actually read this series yet.
>>
>> But I have to admit that so far I do not like this approach...
>> probably I am biased.
>
> Yes.
>
> And I have another concern... this is mostly a feeling, I can be
> easily wrong but:
>
>> On 11/25, Ian Kent wrote:
>> >
>> > +static int umh_set_ns(struct subprocess_info *info, struct cred *new)
>> > +{
>> > +	struct nsproxy *ns = info->data;
>> > +
>> > +	mntns_setfs(ns->mnt_ns);
>>
>> Firstly, it is not clear to me if we should use the caller's ->mnt_ns.
>> Let me remind about the coredump. The dumping task can cloned with
>> CLONE_NEWNS or it cam do unshare(NEWNS)... but OK, I do not understand
>> this enough.
>
> And otoh. If we actually want to use the caller's mnt_ns/namespaces we
> could simply fork/reparent a child which will do execve ?

That would certainly be a better approach, and roughly equivalent to
what exists here.  That would even ensure we remain in the proper
cgroups, and lsm context.

The practical problem with the approach presented here is that I can
hijack any user mode helper I wish, and make it run in any executable I
wish as the global root user.

Ian if we were to merge this I believe you would win the award for
easiest path to a root shell.

Eric

--
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/