netdev - Re: [Drbd-dev] [PATCH 2/2 v2] netlink: kill eff_cap from struct netlink_skb

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, 3 Mar 2011 15:53:05 -0800
From:	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>
To:	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, dm-devel@...hat.com,
	Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>, kaber@...sh.net,
	drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com
Subject: Re: [Drbd-dev] [PATCH 2/2 v2] netlink: kill eff_cap from struct
 netlink_skb_parms

* Lars Ellenberg (lars.ellenberg@...bit.com) wrote:
> Last time I checked, current() for connector based netlink message
> consumers was the work queue that is used for connector.
> 
> So unless that changed, or my understanding is wrong, current_cap()
> inside cn_queue_wrapper(), respectively the d->callback()
> will not be the userland sender process' capabilities, but the work
> queue capabilities.

Yes, you're right.

> If so, then this change introduces the possibility for normal users to
> send privileged commands to connector based subsystems, even if they
> may not be able to bind() to suitable sockets to receive any replies.
> 
> Am I missing something?

No, thanks for review.  This puts back the async issue.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html