linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 3/8] kmod - teach call_usermodehelper() to use a namespace

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:	Wed, 11 Feb 2015 08:40:25 +0800
From:	Ian Kent <ikent@...hat.com>
To:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc:	Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	Benjamin Coddington <bcodding@...hat.com>,
	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
	Jeff Layton <jeff.layton@...marydata.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/8] kmod - teach call_usermodehelper() to use a
 namespace

On Tue, 2015-02-10 at 17:55 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 02/10, Ian Kent wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2015-02-09 at 17:03 +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > >
> > > I understand. but I still can't understand why we can't implement something
> > > like
> > > 	enter_ns(struct nsproxy *p)
> > > 	{
> > > 		new_nsproxy = create_new_namespaces(...);
> > >
> > > 		p->mnt_ns->ns->ops->install(new_nsproxy, ...);
> > > 		p->pid_ns_for_children->ns->ops->install(new_nsproxy, ...);
> > > 		...
> > >
> > > 		switch_task_namespaces(new_nsproxy);
> > > 	}
> > >
> > > Why we should abuse fs/proc ?
> >
> > That sounds like a much better approach.
> > Your saying just take a reference to the nsproxy from the located
> > process and use it instead, right?
> 
> Yes,
> 
> > Working out if there's a difference with what you from the open is
> > challenging (I already tried), I'll have another go at it.
> 
> I thinks there should not be any difference, but please re-check ;)
> 
> > > And. Whatever we do, ops->install() or setns_inode() can't solve the problem with
> > > pid_ns. You need the additional clone() to "activate" it. pidns_install() does not
> > > actually change task_active_pid_ns().
> >
> > Right, but all this is done in preparation for the following do_execve()
> > call. Isn't that enough or am I missing something?
> 
> Yes, but do_execve() doesn't (and shouldn't) change task_active_pid_ns(). Note
> the ->pid_ns_for_children's name. It is only used by copy_process()->alloc_pid().

Right, I vaguely recall seeing something like this earlier in the fork
procedure, I get it. I'll need to have a another look at it.

> 
> task_active_pid_ns() uses task_pid() and we obviously can't change it.
> 
> I am wondering if we can do something like
> 
> 	kernel_thread_in_ns(struct nsproxy *ns, ...)
> 	{
> 		struct nsproxy *saved_ns = current->nsproxy;
> 		pid_t pid;
> 
> 		task_lock(current);
> 		current->nsproxy = ns;
> 		task_unlock(current);
> 
> 		pid = kernel_thread(...);
> 
> 		task_lock(current);
> 		current->nsproxy = saved_ns;
> 		task_unlock(current);
> 
> 		return pid;
> 	}
> 
> used by __call_usermodehelper/wait_for_helper, instead of "enter_ns" from
> sub_info->init()...

Again, thanks for the suggestions.
You've given me a few things think about and check out.

Ian

--
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/