From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serue@us.ibm.com>
To: linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morgan <morgan@kernel.org>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
Subject: [PATCH] don't raise all privs on setuid-root file with fE set (v2)
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 18:47:14 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090402234714.GA2220@us.ibm.com> (raw)
Distributions face a backward compatibility problem with starting to use
file capabilities. For instance, removing setuid root from ping and
doing setcap cap_net_raw=pe means that booting with an older kernel
or one compiled without file capabilities means ping won't work for
non-root users.
In order to replace the setuid root bit on a capability-unaware
program, one has to set the effective, or legacy, file capability,
which makes the capability effective immediately. This patch
uses the legacy bit as a queue to not automatically add full
privilege to a setuid-root program.
So, with this patch, an ordinary setuid-root program will run with
privilege. But if /bin/ping has both setuid-root and cap_net_raw in
fP and fE, then ping (when run by non-root user) will not run
with only cap_net_raw.
Changelog:
Apr 2 2009: Print a message once when such a binary is loaded,
as per James Morris' suggestion.
Apr 2 2009: Fix the condition to only catch uid!=0 && euid==0.
Signed-off-by: Serge E. Hallyn <serue@us.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>
---
security/commoncap.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/security/commoncap.c b/security/commoncap.c
index 7cd61a5..97ac1f1 100644
--- a/security/commoncap.c
+++ b/security/commoncap.c
@@ -28,6 +28,28 @@
#include <linux/prctl.h>
#include <linux/securebits.h>
+/*
+ * If a non-root user executes a setuid-root binary in
+ * !secure(SECURE_NOROOT) mode, then we raise capabilities.
+ * However if fE is also set, then the intent is for only
+ * the file capabilities to be applied, and the setuid-root
+ * bit is left on either to change the uid (plausible) or
+ * to get full privilege on a kernel without file capabilities
+ * support. So in that case we do not raise capabilities.
+ *
+ * Warn if that happens, once per boot.
+ */
+static void warn_setuid_and_fcaps_mixed(char *fname)
+{
+ static int warned;
+ if (!warned) {
+ printk(KERN_INFO "warning: `%s' has both setuid-root and"
+ " effective capabilities. Therefore not raising all"
+ " capabilities.\n", fname);
+ warned = 1;
+ }
+}
+
int cap_netlink_send(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb)
{
NETLINK_CB(skb).eff_cap = current_cap();
@@ -464,6 +486,15 @@ int cap_bprm_set_creds(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
if (!issecure(SECURE_NOROOT)) {
/*
+ * If the legacy file capability is set, then don't set privs
+ * for a setuid root binary run by a non-root user. Do set it
+ * for a root user just to cause least surprise to an admin.
+ */
+ if (effective && new->uid != 0 && new->euid == 0) {
+ warn_setuid_and_fcaps_mixed(bprm->filename);
+ goto skip;
+ }
+ /*
* To support inheritance of root-permissions and suid-root
* executables under compatibility mode, we override the
* capability sets for the file.
@@ -478,6 +509,7 @@ int cap_bprm_set_creds(struct linux_binprm *bprm)
if (new->euid == 0)
effective = true;
}
+skip:
/* Don't let someone trace a set[ug]id/setpcap binary with the revised
* credentials unless they have the appropriate permit
--
1.5.4.3
next reply other threads:[~2009-04-02 23:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-02 23:47 Serge E. Hallyn [this message]
2009-04-03 1:05 ` [PATCH] don't raise all privs on setuid-root file with fE set (v2) James Morris
2009-04-04 18:04 ` Andrew G. Morgan
2009-04-05 3:59 ` Serge E. Hallyn
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=20090402234714.GA2220@us.ibm.com \
--to=serue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=morgan@kernel.org \
/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