public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@canonical.com>
To: Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>
Cc: "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge.hallyn@canonical.com>,
	Eric Paris <eparis@redhat.com>,
	"Andrew G. Morgan" <morgan@kernel.org>,
	"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@canonical.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] System Wide Capability Bounding Set
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 13:38:09 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110128193809.GB8854@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201101281410.29794.sgrubb@redhat.com>

Quoting Steve Grubb (sgrubb@redhat.com):
> On Friday, January 28, 2011 01:49:01 pm Serge E. Hallyn wrote:
> > > Using a wrapper program is a NOGO because the admin renting the machine
> > > would be able  to overwrite the wrapper and then they have arbitrary
> > > code running with full privs and
> > 
> > Not sure I've got this.  Wrapper program in the VM he can over-write,
> > but then he can overwrite the kernel too.
> 
> No, because the kernel is only read in at boot. After that, /boot can disapear and it 

And you can set it up so userspace cannot remount it, I assume?

> won't matter. It can be replaced with something and that won't matter because that's 
> not the real boot partition.
> 
> > But what we are worried about is the host, so you must mean that.  But if the
> > wrapper program is of type noone_may_write_this_t, then wouldn't finding a way to
> > replace that be as hard as overwriting the host kernel? 
> 
> No, because we aren't taking away the ability to mount or unmount. Not to mention that 
> root can replace his selinux policy so that next boot it doesn't define 
> noone_may_write_this_t. He might even put selinux in his VM in permissive.
> 
> > Which, of course, still remains as a viable attack vector for the guest admin,
> > whether you have this bounding set or not.
> 
> No, with the bounding set, any external call the kernel makes has the bounding set 
> applied. This means we don't have to further restrict root in unnatural ways.
> 
> > In other words, we have to accept that the TCB is always not just the
> > kernel, but some user-space too.  And yes, the wrapper program here
> > would be part of the TCB.
> 
> If you give someone root access in the VM, they probably want to set things up their 
> way. So, we really would like it if all the security mechanism were inside where they 
> can't be easily tampered with.

That's cool  :)

Thanks for the elaboration, that's very interesting and helpful.

-serge

  reply	other threads:[~2011-01-28 19:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-01-05 22:25 [PATCH] System Wide Capability Bounding Set Eric Paris
2011-01-06 11:30 ` Tetsuo Handa
2011-01-06 16:44   ` Theodore Tso
2011-01-11 22:02 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2011-01-11 22:12   ` Serge E. Hallyn
2011-01-14 19:50   ` Eric Paris
2011-01-17  3:16     ` Andrew G. Morgan
2011-01-21 21:25       ` Eric Paris
2011-01-23  3:39         ` Andrew G. Morgan
2011-01-24 21:40           ` Serge Hallyn
2011-01-26 23:34             ` Eric Paris
2011-01-27 14:02               ` Serge E. Hallyn
2011-01-27 14:42                 ` Steve Grubb
2011-01-27 16:43                   ` Andrew G. Morgan
     [not found]                   ` <AANLkTi=k5QeE_-iNuW3-M5K3BnBtRxk-QYO5624HKrpE@mail.gmail.com>
2011-01-27 16:50                     ` Steve Grubb
2011-01-28 18:19                       ` Eric Paris
2011-01-28 18:49                   ` Serge E. Hallyn
2011-01-28 19:10                     ` Steve Grubb
2011-01-28 19:38                       ` Serge E. Hallyn [this message]
2011-01-28 22:24                         ` Eric Paris
2011-02-01 18:17                         ` Eric Paris
2011-02-01 21:26                           ` Serge E. Hallyn
2011-02-02  4:02                             ` Andrew G. Morgan
2011-02-08  2:55                               ` Eric Paris
2011-02-14 20:45                                 ` Eric Paris
2011-02-14 21:24                                   ` Serge E. Hallyn
2011-02-18  0:29                                 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2011-01-27 14:26               ` Andrew G. Morgan

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=20110128193809.GB8854@localhost \
    --to=serge.hallyn@canonical.com \
    --cc=eparis@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=morgan@kernel.org \
    --cc=serge@canonical.com \
    --cc=sgrubb@redhat.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