From: Kees Cook <kees.cook@canonical.com>
To: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xenotime.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@gmail.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ptrace: allow restriction of ptrace scope
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 17:46:24 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100617004624.GR24749@outflux.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100617001114.A90F5403D2@magilla.sf.frob.com>
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 05:11:14PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > Though, honestly, just trying to get rid of PTRACE seems like the better
> > place to spend time.
>
> Crushing irony of telling *me* this duly noted. ;-)
> I am not really sure what deeply different set of security constraints
> you envision on any other kind of new debugger interface that would be
> any different for the concerns you've expressed, though.
I haven't though too much about replacements, but it seems like having
a way for processes to declare who/what can debug them is the way to go.
I realize this is very close to MAC policy, but having this be more
general-purpose seems valuable.
Like, a different version of PTRACE_TRACEME, something like PTRACE_BY_YOU.
Imagined example with total lack of error checking and invalid syntax...
void segfault_handler(void) {
pid = horrible_dbus_insanity("spawn a debugger");
prctl(PR_SET_DEBUGGER, pid);
}
PTRACE_TRACEME would be effectively the same as:
void segfault_handler(void) {
if (pid = fork()) {
execl(debugger,getppid());
exit(1);
} else {
prctl(PR_SET_DEBUGGER, pid);
}
}
> > > I suspect you really want to test same_thread_group(walker, current).
> > > You don't actually mean to rule out a debugger that forks children with
> > > one thread and calls ptrace with another, do you?
> >
> > Won't they ultimately have the same parent, though?
>
> Sure, those debugger threads will have the same parent, such as the shell
> that spawned the debugger. But your "security" check is that the caller of
> ptrace is a direct ancestor of the tracee. The ancestry of that ptrace
> caller is immaterial.
Ah right, sorry, I was being too literal (thought in your example the
parent didn't fork a debugger and called ptrace on its children).
Right, this would probably solve the Chrome case, but not KDE, which seems
to fork the crash handler from very far away. I haven't looked too closely
there yet.
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Ubuntu Security Team
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-17 0:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-16 22:18 [PATCH] ptrace: allow restriction of ptrace scope Kees Cook
2010-06-16 23:01 ` Alan Cox
2010-06-16 23:22 ` Kees Cook
2010-06-17 13:45 ` James Morris
2010-06-17 17:04 ` Kees Cook
2010-06-17 20:53 ` Alan Cox
2010-06-17 21:06 ` Randy Dunlap
2010-06-17 21:16 ` Kees Cook
2010-06-17 22:18 ` Alan Cox
2010-06-17 22:25 ` Kees Cook
2010-06-17 22:34 ` Alan Cox
2010-06-17 21:18 ` Alan Cox
2010-06-17 21:51 ` Kees Cook
2010-06-17 22:30 ` Alan Cox
2010-06-17 23:03 ` James Morris
2010-06-18 3:10 ` Casey Schaufler
2010-06-18 10:54 ` Theodore Tso
2010-06-18 13:50 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-06-18 14:29 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2010-06-19 2:23 ` Casey Schaufler
2010-06-19 2:49 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-06-21 0:52 ` James Morris
2010-06-21 2:16 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2010-06-18 17:58 ` Kees Cook
2010-06-19 2:15 ` Tetsuo Handa
2010-06-19 3:19 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2010-06-16 23:10 ` Roland McGrath
2010-06-16 23:39 ` Kees Cook
2010-06-17 0:11 ` Roland McGrath
2010-06-17 0:46 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2010-06-18 12:36 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2010-06-17 12:29 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-06-17 16:59 ` Kees Cook
2010-06-17 20:45 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-06-17 21:14 ` Kees Cook
2010-06-17 22:50 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2010-06-17 23:11 ` Eric W. Biederman
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=20100617004624.GR24749@outflux.net \
--to=kees.cook@canonical.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=hidave.darkstar@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jkosina@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.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