[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190510201032.GA253532@google.com>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2019 22:10:32 +0200
From: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Christian Brauner <christian@...uner.io>,
Tycho Andersen <tycho@...ho.ws>,
David Drysdale <drysdale@...gle.com>,
Chanho Min <chanho.min@....com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Aleksa Sarai <asarai@...e.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/6] binfmt_*: scope path resolution of interpreters
On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 07:38:58PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> writes:
> > In my opinion, CVE-2019-5736 points out two different problems:
> >
> > The big problem: The __ptrace_may_access() logic has a special-case
> > short-circuit for "introspection" that you can't opt out of;
>
> Once upon a time in a galaxy far far away I fixed a bug where we missing
> ptrace_may_access checks on various proc files and systems using selinux
> stopped working. At the time selinux did not allow ptrace like access
> to yourself. The "introspection" special case was the quick and simple
> work-around.
>
> There is nothing fundamental in having the "introspection" special case
> except that various lsms have probably grown to depend upon it being
> there. I expect without difficulty we could move the check down
> into the various lsms. Which would get that check out of the core
> kernel code.
Oh, if that's an option, that would be great, I think.
But this means, for example, that a non-root, non-dumpable process can't
open /proc/self/maps anymore, or open /proc/self/fd/*, and things like
that, without making itself dumpable. I would be surprised if there is
no code out there that relies on that.
>From what I can tell, without the introspection special case,
introspection would fail in the following cases (assuming that the
process is not capable and isn't using sys_setfs[ug]id()):
- ruid/euid/suid are not all the same
- rgid/egid/sgid are not all the same
- process is not dumpable
I think that there probably should be some way for a non-dumpable
process to look at its own procfs entries? If we could start from a
clean slate, I'd propose an opt-in flag to openat() for that, but
since we don't have a clean slate, I'd be afraid of breaking things
with that. But maybe I'm just being overly careful here?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists