From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com>
Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, ebiederm@xmission.com,
serge@hallyn.com, leonro@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RDMA/uverbs: Consider capability of the process that opens the file
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 16:31:48 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250317193148.GU9311@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250313050832.113030-1-parav@nvidia.com>
On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 07:08:32AM +0200, Parav Pandit wrote:
> Currently, the capability check is done on the current process which
> may have the CAP_NET_RAW capability, but such process may not have
> opened the file. A file may could have been opened by a lesser
> privilege process that does not possess the CAP_NET_RAW capability.
> To avoid such situations, perform the capability checks against
> the file's credentials. This approach ensures that the capabilities
> of the process that opened the file are enforced.
>
> Fixes: c938a616aadb ("IB/core: Add raw packet QP type")
> Signed-off-by: Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com>
> Suggested-by: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
>
> ---
>
> Eric,
>
> Shouldn't we check the capabilities of the process that opened the
> file and also the current process that is issuing the create_flow()
> ioctl? This way, the minimum capabilities of both processes are
> considered.
I would say no, that is not our model in RDMA. The process that opens
the file is irrelevant. We only check the current system call context
for capability, much like any other systemcall.
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-17 19:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-13 5:08 [PATCH] RDMA/uverbs: Consider capability of the process that opens the file Parav Pandit
2025-03-17 19:31 ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
2025-03-18 3:43 ` Parav Pandit
2025-03-18 11:20 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-03-18 12:30 ` Parav Pandit
2025-03-18 12:44 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-03-18 20:00 ` Eric W. Biederman
2025-03-18 22:57 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-04-04 14:53 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-04 15:13 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-04-06 14:15 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2025-04-07 11:16 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-07 14:46 ` sergeh
2025-04-20 12:30 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-20 13:41 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2025-04-20 17:31 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-07 16:12 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-04-08 14:44 ` Eric W. Biederman
2025-04-21 3:13 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2025-04-21 11:04 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-21 13:00 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2025-04-21 13:33 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-21 17:22 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2025-04-22 12:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-04-22 13:14 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2025-04-22 16:11 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-04-22 16:29 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2025-04-23 12:41 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-23 14:46 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-04-23 15:43 ` Eric W. Biederman
2025-04-23 15:56 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-23 16:45 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-04-24 9:08 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-24 14:13 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-04-25 13:14 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-25 13:29 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-04-25 13:54 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-25 14:06 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2025-04-25 15:05 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-25 15:29 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2025-04-25 13:59 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2025-04-25 14:01 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2025-04-25 14:24 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-04-25 15:06 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2025-04-25 15:27 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-25 15:46 ` Eric W. Biederman
2025-04-25 16:16 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-25 15:32 ` Eric W. Biederman
2025-04-25 16:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-04-25 17:34 ` Eric W. Biederman
2025-04-25 18:20 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-25 18:35 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-04-27 14:30 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2025-04-28 17:03 ` Eric W. Biederman
2025-04-29 3:56 ` Eric W. Biederman
2025-04-29 10:39 ` Parav Pandit
2025-04-30 3:34 ` Eric W. Biederman
2025-04-30 12:14 ` Parav Pandit
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=20250317193148.GU9311@nvidia.com \
--to=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=leonro@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=parav@nvidia.com \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
/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