From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com>,
"linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RDMA/uverbs: Consider capability of the process that opens the file
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 13:21:02 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250425162102.GA2012301@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87h62ci7ec.fsf@email.froward.int.ebiederm.org>
On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 10:32:27AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > That seems like splitting nits. Can I do current->XXX->user_ns and get
> > different answers? Sounds like yes?
>
> Totally.
>
> current->cred->user_ns (aka current_user_ns) is the what the process
> has.
Well, this is the head hurty bit. "cred->user_ns" is not what the
process "has" if the kernel is checking resource->netns->user_ns for
the capability checks and ignores cred->user_ns?
How does a userspace process actually know what its current
capabilties are? Like how does it tell if CAP_NET_XX is actually
available?
What about something like CAP_SYS_RAWIO? I don't think we would ever
make that a per-userns thing, but as a thought experiment, do we check
current->XXX->user_ns or still check ibdev->netns->XX->user_ns?
> > Is it the kernel's struct ib_device? It has a netns that is captured
> > at its creation time.
>
> Yes. Very much so.
Okay.. And looking at this more we actually check that the process
that opens /dev/../uverbsX has the same net_ns as the ib_device:
static int ib_uverbs_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
{
if (!rdma_dev_access_netns(ib_dev, current->nsproxy->net_ns)) {
ret = -EPERM;
bool rdma_dev_access_netns(const struct ib_device *dev, const struct net *net)
{
return (ib_devices_shared_netns ||
net_eq(read_pnet(&dev->coredev.rdma_net), net));
So you can say we 'captured' the net_ns into the FD as there is some
struct file->....->ib_dev->..->net_ns that does not change
Thus ib_dev->...->user_ns is going to always be the user_ns of the
netns of the process that opened the FD.
So.. hopefully final question.. When we are in a system call context
and want to check CAP_NET_XX should we also require that the current
process has the same net ns as the ib_dev?
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-25 16:21 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
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 [this message]
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=20250425162102.GA2012301@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