From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: "Mickaël Salaün" <mic@digikod.net>
Cc: "Al Viro" <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
"James Morris" <jmorris@namei.org>,
"Serge Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
"Andy Lutomirski" <luto@amacapital.net>,
"Casey Schaufler" <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
"Christian Brauner" <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>,
"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@lst.de>,
"David Howells" <dhowells@redhat.com>,
"Dominik Brodowski" <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>,
"Eric W . Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
"John Johansen" <john.johansen@canonical.com>,
"Kentaro Takeda" <takedakn@nttdata.co.jp>,
"Tetsuo Handa" <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
"Mickaël Salaün" <mic@linux.microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] fs: Allow no_new_privs tasks to call chroot(2)
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2021 14:17:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202103151405.88334370F@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210311105242.874506-2-mic@digikod.net>
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 11:52:42AM +0100, Mickaël Salaün wrote:
> [...]
> This change may not impact systems relying on other permission models
> than POSIX capabilities (e.g. Tomoyo). Being able to use chroot(2) on
> such systems may require to update their security policies.
>
> Only the chroot system call is relaxed with this no_new_privs check; the
> init_chroot() helper doesn't require such change.
>
> Allowing unprivileged users to use chroot(2) is one of the initial
> objectives of no_new_privs:
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/userspace-api/no_new_privs.html
> This patch is a follow-up of a previous one sent by Andy Lutomirski:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/0e2f0f54e19bff53a3739ecfddb4ffa9a6dbde4d.1327858005.git.luto@amacapital.net/
I liked it back when Andy first suggested it, and I still like it now.
:) I'm curious, do you have a specific user in mind for this feature?
> [...]
> @@ -546,8 +547,18 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE1(chroot, const char __user *, filename)
> if (error)
> goto dput_and_out;
>
> + /*
> + * Changing the root directory for the calling task (and its future
> + * children) requires that this task has CAP_SYS_CHROOT in its
> + * namespace, or be running with no_new_privs and not sharing its
> + * fs_struct and not escaping its current root (cf. create_user_ns()).
> + * As for seccomp, checking no_new_privs avoids scenarios where
> + * unprivileged tasks can affect the behavior of privileged children.
> + */
> error = -EPERM;
> - if (!ns_capable(current_user_ns(), CAP_SYS_CHROOT))
> + if (!ns_capable(current_user_ns(), CAP_SYS_CHROOT) &&
> + !(task_no_new_privs(current) && current->fs->users == 1
> + && !current_chrooted()))
> goto dput_and_out;
> error = security_path_chroot(&path);
> if (error)
I think the logic here needs to be rearranged to avoid setting
PF_SUPERPRIV, and I find the many negations hard to read. Perhaps:
static inline int current_chroot_allowed(void)
{
/* comment here */
if (task_no_new_privs(current) && current->fs->users == 1 &&
!current_chrooted())
return 0;
if (ns_capable(current_user_ns(), CAP_SYS_CHROOT))
return 0;
return -EPERM;
}
...
error = current_chroot_allowed();
if (error)
goto dput_and_out;
I can't think of a way to race current->fs->users ...
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-15 21:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-11 10:52 [PATCH v3 0/1] Unprivileged chroot Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-11 10:52 ` [PATCH v3 1/1] fs: Allow no_new_privs tasks to call chroot(2) Mickaël Salaün
2021-03-15 21:17 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2021-03-16 8:17 ` Mickaël Salaün
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=202103151405.88334370F@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=christian.brauner@ubuntu.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=john.johansen@canonical.com \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@dominikbrodowski.net \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mic@digikod.net \
--cc=mic@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=takedakn@nttdata.co.jp \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).