[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <41edd3ad-10cf-41bd-b44a-e72bdd0837a3@schaufler-ca.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 10:00:13 -0800
From: Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
To: Munehisa Kamata <kamatam@...zon.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] proc: Update inode upon changing task security attribute
On 11/29/2023 7:07 PM, Munehisa Kamata wrote:
> Hi Casey,
>
> On Wed, 2023-11-29 18:28:55 -0800, Casey Schaufler wrote:
>> On 11/29/2023 4:37 PM, Munehisa Kamata wrote:
>>> I'm not clear whether VFS is a better (or worse) place[1] to fix the
>>> problem described below and would like to hear opinion.
>> Please To: or at least Cc: me on all Smack related issues.
> Will do that next.
>
>>> If the /proc/[pid] directory is bind-mounted on a system with Smack
>>> enabled, and if the task updates its current security attribute, the task
>>> may lose access to files in its own /proc/[pid] through the mountpoint.
>>>
>>> $ sudo capsh --drop=cap_mac_override --
>>> # mkdir -p dir
>>> # mount --bind /proc/$$ dir
>>> # echo AAA > /proc/$$/task/current # assuming built-in echo
>> I don't see "current" in /proc/$$/task. Did you mean /proc/$$/attr?
> Ahh, yes, I meant /proc/$$/attr/current. Sorry about that...
>
>>> # cat /proc/$$/task/current # revalidate
>>> AAA
>>> # echo BBB > dir/attr/current
>>> # cat dir/attr/current
>>> cat: dir/attr/current: Permission denied
>>> # ls dir/
>>> ls: cannot access dir/: Permission denied
I don't see this behavior. What kernel version are you using?
I have a 6.5 kernel.
>>> # cat /proc/$$/attr/current # revalidate
>>> BBB
>>> # cat dir/attr/current
>>> BBB
>>> # echo CCC > /proc/$$/attr/current
>>> # cat dir/attr/current
>>> cat: dir/attr/current: Permission denied
>>>
>>> This happens because path lookup doesn't revalidate the dentry of the
>>> /proc/[pid] when traversing the filesystem boundary, so the inode security
>>> blob of the /proc/[pid] doesn't get updated with the new task security
>>> attribute. Then, this may lead security modules to deny an access to the
>>> directory. Looking at the code[2] and the /proc/pid/attr/current entry in
>>> proc man page, seems like the same could happen with SELinux. Though, I
>>> didn't find relevant reports.
>>>
>>> The steps above are quite artificial. I actually encountered such an
>>> unexpected denial of access with an in-house application sandbox
>>> framework; each app has its own dedicated filesystem tree where the
>>> process's /proc/[pid] is bind-mounted to and the app enters into via
>>> chroot.
>>>
>>> With this patch, writing to /proc/[pid]/attr/current (and its per-security
>>> module variant) updates the inode security blob of /proc/[pid] or
>>> /proc/[pid]/task/[tid] (when pid != tid) with the new attribute.
>>>
>>> [1] https://lkml.kernel.org/linux-fsdevel/4A2D15AF.8090000@sun.com/
>>> [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/security/selinux/hooks.c#n4220
>>>
>>> Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")
>>> Signed-off-by: Munehisa Kamata <kamatam@...zon.com>
>>> ---
>>> fs/proc/base.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++---
>>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/proc/base.c b/fs/proc/base.c
>>> index dd31e3b6bf77..bdb7bea53475 100644
>>> --- a/fs/proc/base.c
>>> +++ b/fs/proc/base.c
>>> @@ -2741,6 +2741,7 @@ static ssize_t proc_pid_attr_write(struct file * file, const char __user * buf,
>>> {
>>> struct inode * inode = file_inode(file);
>>> struct task_struct *task;
>>> + const char *name = file->f_path.dentry->d_name.name;
>>> void *page;
>>> int rv;
>>>
>>> @@ -2784,10 +2785,26 @@ static ssize_t proc_pid_attr_write(struct file * file, const char __user * buf,
>>> if (rv < 0)
>>> goto out_free;
>>>
>>> - rv = security_setprocattr(PROC_I(inode)->op.lsm,
>>> - file->f_path.dentry->d_name.name, page,
>>> - count);
>>> + rv = security_setprocattr(PROC_I(inode)->op.lsm, name, page, count);
>>> mutex_unlock(¤t->signal->cred_guard_mutex);
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * Update the inode security blob in advance if the task's security
>>> + * attribute was updated
>>> + */
>>> + if (rv > 0 && !strcmp(name, "current")) {
>>> + struct pid *pid;
>>> + struct proc_inode *cur, *ei;
>>> +
>>> + rcu_read_lock();
>>> + pid = get_task_pid(current, PIDTYPE_PID);
>>> + hlist_for_each_entry(cur, &pid->inodes, sibling_inodes)
>>> + ei = cur;
>>> + put_pid(pid);
>>> + pid_update_inode(current, &ei->vfs_inode);
>>> + rcu_read_unlock();
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> out_free:
>>> kfree(page);
>>> out:
Powered by blists - more mailing lists