From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Serge E. Hallyn" Subject: Re: unprivileged mounts git tree Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 18:32:40 -0500 Message-ID: <20080904233240.GB9995@us.ibm.com> References: <20080904132804.GA14709@us.ibm.com> <20080904161729.GA26579@us.ibm.com> <20080904174851.GA13693@hallyn.com> <20080904184916.GA19328@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: ebiederm@xmission.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, hch@infradead.org, viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Miklos Szeredi Return-path: Received: from e36.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.154]:46911 "EHLO e36.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753037AbYIDXcl (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Sep 2008 19:32:41 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Quoting Miklos Szeredi (miklos@szeredi.hu): > On Thu, 4 Sep 2008, Serge E. Hallyn wrote: > > We still have the original problem. > > > > When root does > > > > mount -bind /mnt /mnt > > mount --make-rshared /mnt > > mount --bind -o user=hallyn /mnt /home/hallyn/mnt > > > > and hallyn does > > > > mount --bind /usr /home/hallyn/mnt/usr > > > > then the kernel happily propagates the mount to /mnt/usr. > > Obviously, and that's exactly what root _instructed_ in the last step. > If it's a security problem, root shouldn't do that. > > Your original bug report correctly pointed out the real security > problem: > > | as root: > | mmount --bind -o user=500 /home/hallyn/etc/ /home/hallyn/etc/ > | mount --bind /mnt /mnt > | mount --make-rshared /mnt > | mount --bind /dev /mnt/dev > | > | as hallyn: > | mmount --bind /mnt /home/hallyn/etc/mnt > | /usr/src/mmount-0.3/mmount --bind mnt/dev mnt/src > > Here root does nothing "unsafe", yet the user can get propagation back > into /mnt, due to the fact that a bind mount makes the new mount part > of the old peer group. This is the security hole that is fixed, and > AFAICS the only security hole related to propagation vs. user mounts. > > (I'm going to be offline tomorrow and the weekend, but will hopefully > have email access next week). > > Thanks, > Miklos (&(*$&%, you're right, of course. Ok, will play with it a bit more, but I think it'd be *great* to see this show up in -mm again. -serge