linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] nvme: allow specific passthrough IOs without CAP

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20211003101857.GA10943@lst.de>
Date:   Sun, 3 Oct 2021 12:18:57 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>
Cc:     Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>,
        David Sloan <David.Sloan@...eticom.com>,
        Martin Oliveira <martin.oliveira@...eticom.com>,
        Kanchan Joshi <joshi.k@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] nvme: allow specific passthrough IOs without
 CAP_SYSADMIN

On Sun, Oct 03, 2021 at 12:29:22PM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
>> Users that want to send any of these passthrough commands will still
>> require access to the NVMe char device or namespace. Typically, the
>> char device is only accessible by root anyway and namespaces are
>> accessible by root and the disk group. Administrators are free to
>> add udev rules to adjust these permissions for specific devices they
>> want to allow.
>
> I don't understand what is the difference between VS commands and normal
> commands? Why do you consider VS commands safe to relax privileges as
> opposed to any other command?

They are different in that it is cometely undefine what they do.
So relaxing that checks is an absolute non-starter while for simple
things like Read it might be possible if we really care.