[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrXmjpSvVj_GROhgouNtbzLm5U9B4b364wycMaqApqDVNA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 13:57:30 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>, raven@...maw.net,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/8] Mount, FS, Block and Keyrings notifications [ver #2]
On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 1:39 PM David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > > Here's a set of patches to add a general variable-length notification queue
> > > concept and to add sources of events for:
> >
> > I asked before and didn't see a response, so I'll ask again. Why are you
> > paying any attention at all to the creds that generate an event?
>
> Casey responded to you. It's one of his requirements.
>
It being a "requirement" doesn't make it okay.
> However, the LSMs (or at least SELinux) ignore f_cred and use current_cred()
> when checking permissions. See selinux_revalidate_file_permission() for
> example - it uses current_cred() not file->f_cred to re-evaluate the perms,
> and the fd might be shared between a number of processes with different creds.
That's a bug. It's arguably a rather severe bug. If I ever get
around to writing the patch I keep thinking of that will warn if we
use creds from invalid contexts, it will warn.
Let's please not repeat this.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists