public inbox for linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: danieldurning.work@gmail.com
To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org
Cc: viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, jack@suse.cz,
	paul@paul-moore.com, stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com,
	omosnace@redhat.com
Subject: [RFC PATCH] fs/pidfs: Add permission check to pidfd_info()
Date: Fri,  6 Feb 2026 18:02:48 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260206180248.12418-1-danieldurning.work@gmail.com> (raw)

From: Daniel Durning <danieldurning.work@gmail.com>

Added a permission check to pidfd_info(). Originally, process info
could be retrieved with a pidfd even if proc was mounted with hidepid
enabled, allowing pidfds to be used to bypass those protections. We
now call ptrace_may_access() to perform some DAC checking as well
as call the appropriate LSM hook.

The downside to this approach is that there are now more restrictions
on accessing this info from a pidfd than when just using proc (without
hidepid). I am open to suggestions if anyone can think of a better way
to handle this.

I have also noticed that it is possible to use pidfds to poll on any
process regardless of whether the process is a child of the caller,
has a different UID, or has a different security context. Is this
also worth addressing? If so, what exactly should the DAC checks be?

Signed-off-by: Daniel Durning <danieldurning.work@gmail.com>
---
 fs/pidfs.c | 7 +++++++
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)

diff --git a/fs/pidfs.c b/fs/pidfs.c
index dba703d4ce4a..058a7d798bca 100644
--- a/fs/pidfs.c
+++ b/fs/pidfs.c
@@ -365,6 +365,13 @@ static long pidfd_info(struct file *file, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
 		goto copy_out;
 	}
 
+	/*
+	 * Do a filesystem cred ptrace check to verify access
+	 * to the task's info.
+	 */
+	if (!ptrace_may_access(task, PTRACE_MODE_READ_FSCREDS))
+		return -EACCES;
+
 	c = get_task_cred(task);
 	if (!c)
 		return -ESRCH;
-- 
2.52.0


             reply	other threads:[~2026-02-06 18:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-02-06 18:02 danieldurning.work [this message]
2026-02-09 14:01 ` [RFC PATCH] fs/pidfs: Add permission check to pidfd_info() Christian Brauner
2026-02-11 19:43   ` Daniel Durning
2026-02-17 12:01     ` Christian Brauner
2026-02-20 20:45       ` Daniel Durning
2026-02-24 11:18         ` Christian Brauner

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=20260206180248.12418-1-danieldurning.work@gmail.com \
    --to=danieldurning.work@gmail.com \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=jack@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=omosnace@redhat.com \
    --cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
    --cc=selinux@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com \
    --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