Re: severe security issue on dom0/xend/xm/non-root users

[David Hopwood <david.nospam.hopwood@blueyonder.co.uk>]

Kurt Garloff wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 06, 2005 at 04:14:24PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
>>On Sun, 6 Mar 2005, Tommi Virtanen wrote:
>>
>>>That's not good design. I sincerely think access to any confidential
>>>or security conscious part of xen should be limited, e.g. with a
>>>unix domain socket located in a directory only readable by a certain
>>>group.
>>
>>Good point, then we could use filesystem permissions
>>and/or selinux policy to restrict who gets access to
>>xend.
> 
> Why not just require the other end of the socket to be below 1024?

Please don't. The permission should be something that can be specifically
granted to a user or group id, not that requires root. Requiring root
tends to cause as many security problems as it solves.

> If you bind to localhost, that should be enough.
> 
> xm would then use a privileged socket if it can (i.e. if called as 
> root).
> 
> Using an selinux policy for this would be aiming cannons at sparrows
> (german saying, in english that's breaking a fly on the wheel).

"using a sledgehammer to crack a nut".

-- 
David Hopwood <david.nospam.hopwood@blueyonder.co.uk>



-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click