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: <7eee2029-4269-f9ab-78a7-341556f1350d@gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 24 Jun 2016 10:40:39 +0200
From:	"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
To:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:	mtk.manpages@...il.com, Jann Horn <jann@...jh.net>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	linux-man <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>,
	Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Subject: Re: Documenting ptrace access mode checking

On 06/22/2016 11:11 PM, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
> <mtk.manpages@...il.com> wrote:
>> On 06/21/2016 10:55 PM, Jann Horn wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 11:41:16AM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
>>> wrote:
>>>>        5.  The  kernel LSM security_ptrace_access_check() interface is
>>>>            invoked to see if ptrace access is permitted.  The  results
>>>>            depend on the LSM.  The implementation of this interface in
>>>>            the default LSM performs the following steps:
>>>
>>>
>>> For people who are unaware of how the LSM API works, it might be good to
>>> clarify that the commoncap LSM is *always* invoked; otherwise, it might
>>> give the impression that using another LSM would replace it.
>>
>>
>> As we can see, I am one of those who are unaware of how the LSM API
>> works :-/.
>>
>>> (Also, are there other documents that refer to it as "default LSM"? I
>>> think that that term is slightly confusing.)
>>
>>
>> No, that's a terminological confusion of my own making. Fixed now.
>>
>> I changed this text to:
>>
>>        Various parts of the kernel-user-space API (not just  ptrace(2)
>>        operations), require so-called "ptrace access mode permissions"
>>        which are gated by any enabled Linux Security Module (LSMs)—for
>>        example,  SELinux,  Yama, or Smack—and by the the commoncap LSM
>>        (which is always invoked).  Prior to  Linux  2.6.27,  all  such
>>        checks  were  of a single type.  Since Linux 2.6.27, two access
>>        mode levels are distinguished:
>>
>> BTW, can you point me at the piece(s) of kernel code that show that
>> "commoncap" is always invoked in addition to any other LSM that has
>> been installed?
>
> It's not entirely obvious, but the bottom of security/commoncap.c shows:
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY
>
> struct security_hook_list capability_hooks[] = {
>         LSM_HOOK_INIT(capable, cap_capable),
> ...
> };
>
> void __init capability_add_hooks(void)
> {
>         security_add_hooks(capability_hooks, ARRAY_SIZE(capability_hooks));
> }
>
> #endif
>
> And security/security.c shows the initialization order of the LSMs:
>
> int __init security_init(void)
> {
>         pr_info("Security Framework initialized\n");
>
>         /*
>          * Load minor LSMs, with the capability module always first.
>          */
>         capability_add_hooks();
>         yama_add_hooks();
>         loadpin_add_hooks();
>
>         /*
>          * Load all the remaining security modules.
>          */
>         do_security_initcalls();
>
>         return 0;
> }

So, I just want to check my understanding of a couple of points:

1. The commoncap LSM is invoked first, and if it denies access,
    then no further LSM is/needs to be called.

2. Is it the case that only one of the other LSMs (SELinux, Yama,
    AppArmor, etc.) is invoked, or can more than one be invoked.
    I thought only one is invoked, but perhaps I am out of date
    in my understanding.

Cheers,

Michael


-- 
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ