From: Aristeu Rozanski <aris@redhat.com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@canonical.com>,
Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v3] device_cgroup: check if exception removal is allowed
Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 11:18:59 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140505151858.GL29214@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140505151621.GJ11231@htj.dyndns.org>
[PATCH v3 1/2] device_cgroup: check if exception removal is allowed
When the device cgroup hierarchy was introduced in
bd2953ebbb53 - devcg: propagate local changes down the hierarchy
a specific case was overlooked. Consider the hierarchy bellow:
A default policy: ALLOW, exceptions will deny access
\
B default policy: ALLOW, exceptions will deny access
There's no need to verify when an new exception is added to B because
in this case exceptions will deny access to further devices, which is
always fine. Hierarchy in device cgroup only makes sure B won't have
more access than A.
But when an exception is removed (by writing devices.allow), it isn't
checked if the user is in fact removing an inherited exception from A,
thus giving more access to B.
Example:
# echo 'a' >A/devices.allow
# echo 'c 1:3 rw' >A/devices.deny
# echo $$ >A/B/tasks
# echo >/dev/null
-bash: /dev/null: Operation not permitted
# echo 'c 1:3 w' >A/B/devices.allow
# echo >/dev/null
#
This shouldn't be allowed and this patch fixes it by making sure to never allow
exceptions in this case to be removed if the exception is partially or fully
present on the parent.
v3: missing '*' in function description
v2: improved log message and formatting fixes
Cc: cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@canonical.com>
Cc: Li Zefan <lizefan@huawei.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Aristeu Rozanski <arozansk@redhat.com>
---
security/device_cgroup.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
--- github.orig/security/device_cgroup.c 2014-05-05 10:42:39.588430715 -0400
+++ github/security/device_cgroup.c 2014-05-05 11:17:35.408486409 -0400
@@ -464,6 +464,37 @@ static int parent_has_perm(struct dev_cg
}
/**
+ * parent_allows_removal - verify if it's ok to remove an exception
+ * @childcg: child cgroup from where the exception will be removed
+ * @ex: exception being removed
+ *
+ * When removing an exception in cgroups with default ALLOW policy, it must
+ * be checked if removing it will give the child cgroup more access than the
+ * parent.
+ *
+ * Return: true if it's ok to remove exception, false otherwise
+ */
+static bool parent_allows_removal(struct dev_cgroup *childcg,
+ struct dev_exception_item *ex)
+{
+ struct dev_cgroup *parent = css_to_devcgroup(css_parent(&childcg->css));
+
+ if (!parent)
+ return true;
+
+ /* It's always allowed to remove access to devices */
+ if (childcg->behavior == DEVCG_DEFAULT_DENY)
+ return true;
+
+ /*
+ * Make sure you're not removing part or a whole exception existing in
+ * the parent cgroup
+ */
+ return !match_exception_partial(&parent->exceptions, ex->type,
+ ex->major, ex->minor, ex->access);
+}
+
+/**
* may_allow_all - checks if it's possible to change the behavior to
* allow based on parent's rules.
* @parent: device cgroup's parent
@@ -698,17 +729,21 @@ case '\0':
switch (filetype) {
case DEVCG_ALLOW:
- if (!parent_has_perm(devcgroup, &ex))
- return -EPERM;
/*
* If the default policy is to allow by default, try to remove
* an matching exception instead. And be silent about it: we
* don't want to break compatibility
*/
if (devcgroup->behavior == DEVCG_DEFAULT_ALLOW) {
+ /* Check if the parent allows removing it first */
+ if (!parent_allows_removal(devcgroup, &ex))
+ return -EPERM;
dev_exception_rm(devcgroup, &ex);
- return 0;
+ break;
}
+
+ if (!parent_has_perm(devcgroup, &ex))
+ return -EPERM;
rc = dev_exception_add(devcgroup, &ex);
break;
case DEVCG_DENY:
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-05 15:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-24 19:32 [PATCH] device_cgroup: check if exception removal is allowed Aristeu Rozanski
2014-04-28 20:30 ` Serge Hallyn
[not found] ` <20140424193254.GR29214-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2014-05-02 15:29 ` Tejun Heo
[not found] ` <20140502152930.GF10204-Gd/HAXX7CRxy/B6EtB590w@public.gmane.org>
2014-05-05 15:14 ` [PATCH v2] " Aristeu Rozanski
2014-05-05 15:16 ` Tejun Heo
2014-05-05 15:18 ` Aristeu Rozanski [this message]
[not found] ` <20140505151858.GL29214-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2014-05-05 15:21 ` [PATCH v3] " Tejun Heo
2014-05-05 18:46 ` Serge Hallyn
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=20140505151858.GL29214@redhat.com \
--to=aris@redhat.com \
--cc=cgroups@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizefan@huawei.com \
--cc=serge.hallyn@canonical.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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.