[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <5EF0D46A-C098-4B51-AD13-225FFCA35D4C@vt.edu>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2018 20:51:50 -0400
From: TongZhang <ztong@...edu>
To: darrick.wong@...cle.com
Cc: linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
Wenbo Shen <shenwenbosmile@...il.com>
Subject: Leaking Path in XFS's ioctl interface(missing LSM check)
Hi,
I'm bringing up this issue again to let of LSM developers know the situation, and would like to know your thoughts.
Several weeks ago I sent an email to the security list to discuss the issue where
XFS's ioctl interface can do things like vfs_readlink without asking LSM's
permission, which we think is kind of weird and this kind of operation should be
audited by LSM.
see the original post below:
>We noticed a use of vfs_readlink() in xfs_file_ioctl(), which should have been checked by
>security_inode_readlink().
>The callgraph is:
> xfs_file_ioctl()->xfs_readlink_by_handle()->vfs_readlink()
>
>This path allows user to do things similar to SyS_readlinkat(), and the parameters
>are user controllable.
security_inode_readlink() is not used inside vfs_readlink()
- Tong
Powered by blists - more mailing lists