linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] openvswitch: allow management from inside user namespaces

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 11 Feb 2016 09:53:45 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	tycho.andersen@...onical.com
Cc:	pshelar@....org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	jpettit@...ira.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] openvswitch: allow management from inside user
 namespaces

From: Tycho Andersen <tycho.andersen@...onical.com>
Date: Fri,  5 Feb 2016 09:20:52 -0700

> Operations with the GENL_ADMIN_PERM flag fail permissions checks because
> this flag means we call netlink_capable, which uses the init user ns.
> 
> Instead, let's introduce a new flag, GENL_UNS_ADMIN_PERM for operations
> which should be allowed inside a user namespace.
> 
> The motivation for this is to be able to run openvswitch in unprivileged
> containers. I've tested this and it seems to work, but I really have no
> idea about the security consequences of this patch, so thoughts would be
> much appreciated.
> 
> v2: use the GENL_UNS_ADMIN_PERM flag instead of a check in each function
> v3: use separate ifs for UNS_ADMIN_PERM and ADMIN_PERM, instead of one
>     massive one
> 
> Reported-by: James Page <james.page@...onical.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tycho Andersen <tycho.andersen@...onical.com>

Applied, thanks.