From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, security@kernel.org
Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@gmail.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@gmail.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Frank Filz <ffilzlnx@mindspring.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] fs: Harden against open(..., O_CREAT, 02777) in a setgid directory
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 06:43:23 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1485863003.2700.10.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <99f64a2676f0bec4ad32e39fc76eb0914ee091b8.1485571668.git.luto@kernel.org>
On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 18:49 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> Currently, if you open("foo", O_WRONLY | O_CREAT | ..., 02777) in a
> directory that is setgid and owned by a different gid than current's
> fsgid, you end up with an SGID executable that is owned by the
> directory's GID. This is a Bad Thing (tm). Exploiting this is
> nontrivial because most ways of creating a new file create an empty
> file and empty executables aren't particularly interesting, but this
> is nevertheless quite dangerous.
>
> Harden against this type of attack by detecting this particular
> corner case (unprivileged program creates SGID executable inode in
> SGID directory owned by a different GID) and clearing the new
> inode's SGID bit.
>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
> ---
> fs/inode.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
> index 0e1e141b094c..f6acb9232263 100644
> --- a/fs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/inode.c
> @@ -2025,12 +2025,30 @@ void inode_init_owner(struct inode *inode, const struct inode *dir,
> umode_t mode)
> {
> inode->i_uid = current_fsuid();
> + inode->i_gid = current_fsgid();
> +
> if (dir && dir->i_mode & S_ISGID) {
I'm surprised the compiler doesn't complain about ambiguous order of ops
in the above if statement. Might be nice to add some parenthesis there
since you're in here, just for clarity.
> + bool changing_gid = !gid_eq(inode->i_gid, dir->i_gid);
> +
> inode->i_gid = dir->i_gid;
> - if (S_ISDIR(mode))
> +
> + if (S_ISDIR(mode)) {
> mode |= S_ISGID;
> - } else
> - inode->i_gid = current_fsgid();
> + } else if (((mode & (S_ISGID | S_IXGRP)) == (S_ISGID | S_IXGRP))
> + && S_ISREG(mode) && changing_gid
> + && !capable(CAP_FSETID)) {
> + /*
> + * Whoa there! An unprivileged program just
> + * tried to create a new executable with SGID
> + * set in a directory with SGID set that belongs
> + * to a different group. Don't let this program
> + * create a SGID executable that ends up owned
> + * by the wrong group.
> + */
> + mode &= ~S_ISGID;
> + }
> + }
> +
> inode->i_mode = mode;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(inode_init_owner);
It's hard to picture any applications that would rely on the legacy
behavior, but if they come out of the woodwork, we could always add a
"make my kernel unsafe" command-line or compile time switch to bring it
back.
I think this is reasonable thing to do, but Michael K. is correct that
we should document the behavior changes in the relevant manpages.
Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, security@kernel.org
Cc: Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@gmail.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
yalin wang <yalin.wang2010@gmail.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Frank Filz <ffilzlnx@mindspring.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] fs: Harden against open(..., O_CREAT, 02777) in a setgid directory
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 06:43:23 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1485863003.2700.10.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <99f64a2676f0bec4ad32e39fc76eb0914ee091b8.1485571668.git.luto@kernel.org>
On Fri, 2017-01-27 at 18:49 -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> Currently, if you open("foo", O_WRONLY | O_CREAT | ..., 02777) in a
> directory that is setgid and owned by a different gid than current's
> fsgid, you end up with an SGID executable that is owned by the
> directory's GID. This is a Bad Thing (tm). Exploiting this is
> nontrivial because most ways of creating a new file create an empty
> file and empty executables aren't particularly interesting, but this
> is nevertheless quite dangerous.
>
> Harden against this type of attack by detecting this particular
> corner case (unprivileged program creates SGID executable inode in
> SGID directory owned by a different GID) and clearing the new
> inode's SGID bit.
>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
> ---
> fs/inode.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/inode.c b/fs/inode.c
> index 0e1e141b094c..f6acb9232263 100644
> --- a/fs/inode.c
> +++ b/fs/inode.c
> @@ -2025,12 +2025,30 @@ void inode_init_owner(struct inode *inode, const struct inode *dir,
> umode_t mode)
> {
> inode->i_uid = current_fsuid();
> + inode->i_gid = current_fsgid();
> +
> if (dir && dir->i_mode & S_ISGID) {
I'm surprised the compiler doesn't complain about ambiguous order of ops
in the above if statement. Might be nice to add some parenthesis there
since you're in here, just for clarity.
> + bool changing_gid = !gid_eq(inode->i_gid, dir->i_gid);
> +
> inode->i_gid = dir->i_gid;
> - if (S_ISDIR(mode))
> +
> + if (S_ISDIR(mode)) {
> mode |= S_ISGID;
> - } else
> - inode->i_gid = current_fsgid();
> + } else if (((mode & (S_ISGID | S_IXGRP)) == (S_ISGID | S_IXGRP))
> + && S_ISREG(mode) && changing_gid
> + && !capable(CAP_FSETID)) {
> + /*
> + * Whoa there! An unprivileged program just
> + * tried to create a new executable with SGID
> + * set in a directory with SGID set that belongs
> + * to a different group. Don't let this program
> + * create a SGID executable that ends up owned
> + * by the wrong group.
> + */
> + mode &= ~S_ISGID;
> + }
> + }
> +
> inode->i_mode = mode;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(inode_init_owner);
It's hard to picture any applications that would rely on the legacy
behavior, but if they come out of the woodwork, we could always add a
"make my kernel unsafe" command-line or compile time switch to bring it
back.
I think this is reasonable thing to do, but Michael K. is correct that
we should document the behavior changes in the relevant manpages.
Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-31 11:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-28 2:49 [PATCH v2 0/2] setgid hardening Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-28 2:49 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-28 2:49 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] fs: Check f_cred as well as of current's creds in should_remove_suid() Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-28 2:49 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-31 3:50 ` Michael Kerrisk
2017-01-31 3:50 ` Michael Kerrisk
2017-01-31 11:43 ` Jeff Layton
2017-01-31 11:43 ` Jeff Layton
2017-01-28 2:49 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] fs: Harden against open(..., O_CREAT, 02777) in a setgid directory Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-28 2:49 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-31 3:50 ` Michael Kerrisk
2017-01-31 3:50 ` Michael Kerrisk
2017-01-31 11:43 ` Jeff Layton [this message]
2017-01-31 11:43 ` Jeff Layton
2017-01-31 16:51 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-31 16:51 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-31 3:49 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] setgid hardening Michael Kerrisk
2017-01-31 3:49 ` Michael Kerrisk
2017-01-31 3:56 ` Andy Lutomirski
2017-01-31 3:56 ` Andy Lutomirski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1485863003.2700.10.camel@redhat.com \
--to=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ffilzlnx@mindspring.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=koct9i@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=security@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=w@1wt.eu \
--cc=yalin.wang2010@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.