linux-kernel - Re: [capabilities] Allow normal inheritance for a configurable set of capabilities

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: <20150203155544.GE2923@mail.hallyn.com>
Date:	Tue, 3 Feb 2015 16:55:44 +0100
From:	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc:	Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...ntu.com>,
	Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@...onical.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Aaron Jones <aaronmdjones@...il.com>, Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...uxfoundation.org,
	morgan@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [capabilities] Allow normal inheritance for a configurable set
 of capabilities

Quoting Christoph Lameter (cl@...ux.com):
> On Mon, 2 Feb 2015, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> 
> > A key concept behind posix capabilities is that the privilege comes from
> > both the person and the file being executed.  As you say below basically
> > anything can be executed by the program so that is completely violated.
> 
> Well this patch does not change that. Its just that the file being
> executed can inherit the parent caps without having to set caps in the new
> executable.
> 
> > Still, it's not that different from mmapping some arbitrary code and
> > jumping into it whlie retaining caps.
> 
> Owww. Thats a pretty far jump from what this patch does.

Hm?  That's not something about a kernel patch - it's just something you
can do in userspace today to not lose your privilege in several mac
systems.

> > Not saying this is a good idea necessarily, but worth thinking about.
> 
> Well we keep on having actual problems with caps for long years now. We
> need a solution. This means a patch that solves the issue.

We've currently got two proposals.  (Three includig yours;  but I explained my
problem with yours earlier this morning -  do appreciate the proposal and
the patch though, really, thanks)  It's worth digging into the details of
each, but if they end up complicating things then perhaps "dropping
capabilities and going with something new" ought to be another proposal.
--
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/