lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 12 Nov 2019 15:15:15 -0800
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
Cc:     Topi Miettinen <toiwoton@...il.com>,
        Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:FILESYSTEMS (VFS and infrastructure)" 
        <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow restricting permissions in /proc/sys

On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 12:56:48PM -0500, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 03, 2019 at 04:55:48PM +0200, Topi Miettinen wrote:
> > Several items in /proc/sys need not be accessible to unprivileged
> > tasks. Let the system administrator change the permissions, but only
> > to more restrictive modes than what the sysctl tables allow.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Topi Miettinen <toiwoton@...il.com>
> 
> Why should restruct the system administrator from changing the
> permissions to one which is more lax than what the sysctl tables?
> 
> The system administrator is already very much trusted.  Why should we
> take that discretion away from the system administrator?

Generally speaking, they're there to provide some sense of boundary
between uid 0 and the kernel proper. I think it's correct to not allow
weakening of these permissions (which is the current state: no change at
all).

-- 
Kees Cook

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ