[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHC9VhSzo4DsMRknOA-4KKYJEir0wW74+quLheTjRw94OmhscA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 11:40:49 -0400
From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: "chengjian (D)" <cj.chengjian@...wei.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>,
Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@...app.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"Xiexiuqi (Xie XiuQi)" <xiexiuqi@...wei.com>,
Li Bin <huawei.libin@...wei.com>,
Jason Yan <yanaijie@...wei.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Linux Security Module list
<linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
SELinux <selinux@...r.kernel.org>,
Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: kernel BUG at kernel/cred.c:434!
On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 10:57 AM Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 04/17, Paul Moore wrote:
> >
> > I'm tempted to simply return an error in selinux_setprocattr() if
> > the task's credentials are not the same as its real_cred;
>
> What about other modules? I have no idea what smack_setprocattr() is,
> but it too does prepare_creds/commit creds.
>
> it seems that the simplest workaround should simply add the additional
> cred == real_cred into proc_pid_attr_write().
Yes, that is simple, but I worry about what other LSMs might want to
do. While I believe failing if the effective creds are not the same
as the real_creds is okay for SELinux (possibly Smack too), I worry
about what other LSMs may want to do. After all,
proc_pid_attr_write() doesn't change the the creds itself, that is
something the specific LSMs do.
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists