netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 net-next] Introduce a sysctl that modifies the value of PROT

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:   Mon, 23 Jan 2017 15:39:49 -0500 (EST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     kjlx@...pleofstupid.com
Cc:     eric.dumazet@...il.com, stephen@...workplumber.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next] Introduce a sysctl that modifies the value
 of PROT_SOCK.

From: Krister Johansen <kjlx@...pleofstupid.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 17:49:11 -0800

> Add net.ipv4.ip_unprivileged_port_start, which is a per namespace sysctl
> that denotes the first unprivileged inet port in the namespace.  To
> disable all privileged ports set this to zero.  It also checks for
> overlap with the local port range.  The privileged and local range may
> not overlap.
> 
> The use case for this change is to allow containerized processes to bind
> to priviliged ports, but prevent them from ever being allowed to modify
> their container's network configuration.  The latter is accomplished by
> ensuring that the network namespace is not a child of the user
> namespace.  This modification was needed to allow the container manager
> to disable a namespace's priviliged port restrictions without exposing
> control of the network namespace to processes in the user namespace.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krister Johansen <kjlx@...pleofstupid.com>

I'm not ignoring this change, I just want to think about it some more.

Just FYI...