[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87y21zhjq3.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2022 18:29:24 -0600
From: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
Etienne Dechamps <etienne@...champs.fr>,
Alexey Gladkov <legion@...nel.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>,
Ran Xiaokai <ran.xiaokai@....com.cn>,
"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Containers <containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>,
Security Officers <security@...nel.org>,
Neil Brown <neilb@....unsw.edu.au>, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
Linus Torvalds <linus@...valds.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ucounts: Fix systemd LimigtNPROC with private users
regression
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> writes:
> typo: Subject's LimigtNPROC -> LimitNPROC
>
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 09:41:44AM -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> Long story short recursively enforcing RLIMIT_NPROC when it is not
>> enforced on the process that creates a new user namespace, causes
>> currently working code to fail. There is no reason to enforce
>> RLIMIT_NPROC recursively when we don't enforce it normally so update
>> the code to detect this case.
>>
>> I would like to simply use capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE) to detect when
>> RLIMIT_NPROC is not enforced upon the caller. Unfortunately because
>> RLIMIT_NPROC is charged and checked for enforcement based upon the
>> real uid, using capable() wich is euid based is inconsistent with reality.
>
> typo: wich -> which
Ahh... Typos.
>> Come as close as possible to testing for capable(CAP_SYS_RESOURCE) by
>> testing for when the real uid would match the conditions when
>> CAP_SYS_RESOURCE would be present if the real uid was the effective
>> uid.
>>
>> Reported-by: Etienne Dechamps <etienne@...champs.fr>
>> Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=215596
>> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/e9589141-cfeb-90cd-2d0e-83a62787239a@edechamps.fr
>> Fixes: 21d1c5e386bc ("Reimplement RLIMIT_NPROC on top of ucounts")
>> Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
>> ---
>>
>> The previous conversation has given me enough clarity that I can see
>> which tests I am comfortable with use for this pending regression fix.
>>
>> I have tested this and it works for me. Does anyone have any concerns
>> with this change?
>
> I'd really love some kind of selftest that exercises the edge cases; do
> you have your tests in some form that could be converted?
>
> But otherwise, yes, this looks like the best option here.
Let's start with Michal Koutný tests. I keep forgetting to look at
them. This cold has really been kicking my butt.
For this issue the test case was a systemd unit file. Which is simple
and demonstrates the real-world regression but not really minimal in the
way a kernel selftest should be.
> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
>
>>
>> kernel/user_namespace.c | 14 +++++++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/user_namespace.c b/kernel/user_namespace.c
>> index 6b2e3ca7ee99..5481ba44a8d6 100644
>> --- a/kernel/user_namespace.c
>> +++ b/kernel/user_namespace.c
>> @@ -58,6 +58,18 @@ static void set_cred_user_ns(struct cred *cred, struct user_namespace *user_ns)
>> cred->user_ns = user_ns;
>> }
>>
>> +static unsigned long enforced_nproc_rlimit(void)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long limit = RLIM_INFINITY;
>> +
>> + /* Is RLIMIT_NPROC currently enforced? */
>> + if (!uid_eq(current_uid(), GLOBAL_ROOT_UID) ||
>> + (current_user_ns() != &init_user_ns))
>> + limit = rlimit(RLIMIT_NPROC);
>> +
>> + return limit;
>> +}
>> +
>> /*
>> * Create a new user namespace, deriving the creator from the user in the
>> * passed credentials, and replacing that user with the new root user for the
>> @@ -122,7 +134,7 @@ int create_user_ns(struct cred *new)
>> for (i = 0; i < MAX_PER_NAMESPACE_UCOUNTS; i++) {
>> ns->ucount_max[i] = INT_MAX;
>> }
>> - set_rlimit_ucount_max(ns, UCOUNT_RLIMIT_NPROC, rlimit(RLIMIT_NPROC));
>> + set_rlimit_ucount_max(ns, UCOUNT_RLIMIT_NPROC, enforced_nproc_rlimit());
>> set_rlimit_ucount_max(ns, UCOUNT_RLIMIT_MSGQUEUE, rlimit(RLIMIT_MSGQUEUE));
>> set_rlimit_ucount_max(ns, UCOUNT_RLIMIT_SIGPENDING, rlimit(RLIMIT_SIGPENDING));
>> set_rlimit_ucount_max(ns, UCOUNT_RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, rlimit(RLIMIT_MEMLOCK));
>> --
>> 2.29.2
>>
Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists