linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4.9 45/47] Smack: Dont ignore other bprm->unsafe flags if LSM_UNSAFE

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:   Thu, 12 Dec 2019 18:06:49 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
Cc:     Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
        Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.9 45/47] Smack: Dont ignore other bprm->unsafe flags if
 LSM_UNSAFE_PTRACE is set

On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 03:50:07PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2019-10-06 at 19:21 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > From: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
> > 
> > commit 3675f052b43ba51b99b85b073c7070e083f3e6fb upstream.
> [...]
> > --- a/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
> > +++ b/security/smack/smack_lsm.c
> > @@ -949,7 +949,8 @@ static int smack_bprm_set_creds(struct l
> >  
> >  		if (rc != 0)
> >  			return rc;
> > -	} else if (bprm->unsafe)
> > +	}
> > +	if (bprm->unsafe & ~LSM_UNSAFE_PTRACE)
> 
> I think this needs to be ~(LSM_UNSAFE_PTRACE | LSM_UNSAFE_PTRACE_CAP)
> for 4.9 and older branches.

Why?  Where did the LSM_UNSAFE_PTRACE_CAP requirement come from (or
really, go away?)

thanks,

greg k-h