[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrW2nn=omqJb4p+m-BDsCOhg+YZQ3ELd4BdhODV3G44gfA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2019 14:20:23 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.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>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.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>,
Linux Containers <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 Fri, May 10, 2019 at 1:41 PM Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 05:17:35AM +1000, Aleksa Sarai wrote:
> > On 2019-05-06, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com> wrote:
> > > 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; this
> > > makes it possible to open things in procfs that are related to the
> > > current process even if the credentials of the process wouldn't permit
> > > accessing another process like it. I think the proper fix to deal with
> > > this would be to add a prctl() flag for "set whether introspection is
> > > allowed for this process", and if userspace has manually un-set that
> > > flag, any introspection special-case logic would be skipped.
> >
> > We could do PR_SET_DUMPABLE=3 for this, I guess?
>
> Hmm... I'd make it a new prctl() command, since introspection is
> somewhat orthogonal to dumpability. Also, dumpability is per-mm, and I
> think the introspection flag should be per-thread.
I've lost track of the context here, but it seems to me that
mitigating attacks involving accidental following of /proc links
shouldn't depend on dumpability. What's the actual problem this is
trying to solve again?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists