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]
Message-ID: <13bc7935-8341-bb49-74ea-2eb58f72fd1f@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 13 Nov 2019 18:19:17 +0200
From:   Topi Miettinen <toiwoton@...il.com>
To:     Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Cc:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.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>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow restricting permissions in /proc/sys

On 13.11.2019 18.00, Jann Horn wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2019 at 12:22 AM Christian Brauner
> <christian.brauner@...ntu.com> 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>
>>> ---
>>>   fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
>>>   1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c b/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c
>>> index d80989b6c344..88c4ca7d2782 100644
>>> --- a/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c
>>> +++ b/fs/proc/proc_sysctl.c
>>> @@ -818,6 +818,10 @@ static int proc_sys_permission(struct inode *inode, int
>>> mask)
>>>          if ((mask & MAY_EXEC) && S_ISREG(inode->i_mode))
>>>                  return -EACCES;
>>>
>>> +       error = generic_permission(inode, mask);
>>> +       if (error)
>>> +               return error;
> 
> In kernel/ucount.c, the ->permissions handler set_permissions() grants
> access based on whether the caller has CAP_SYS_RESOURCE. And in
> net/sysctl_net.c, the handler net_ctl_permissions() grants access
> based on whether the caller has CAP_NET_ADMIN. This added check is
> going to break those, right?
> 

Right. The comment above seems then a bit misleading:
	/*
	 * sysctl entries that are not writeable,
	 * are _NOT_ writeable, capabilities or not.
	 */

-Topi

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ