From: Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@canonical.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Containers <containers@lists.osdl.org>,
St?phane Graber <stgraber@ubuntu.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@free.fr>
Subject: Re: prevent containers from turning host filesystem readonly
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 21:57:06 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120211035705.GA5563@sergelap> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120211033732.GK23916@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Quoting Al Viro (viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk):
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 09:19:39PM -0600, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > When a container shuts down, it likes to do 'mount -o remount,ro /'.
> > That sets the superblock's readonly flag, not the mount's. So unless
> > the mount action fails for some reason (i.e. a file is held open on
> > the fs), if the container's rootfs is just a directory on the host's
> > fs, the host fs will be marked readonly.
> >
> > Thanks to Dave Hansen for pointing out how simple the fix can be. If
> > the devices cgroup denies the mounting task write access to the
> > underlying superblock (as it usually does when the container's root fs
> > is on a block device shared with the host), then it do_remount_sb should
> > deny the right to change mount flags as well.
> >
> > This patch adds that check.
> >
> > Note that another possibility would be to have the LSM step in. We
> > can't catch this (as is) at the LSM level because security_remount_sb
> > doesn't get the mount flags, so we can't distinguish
> > mount -o remount,ro
> > from
> > mount --bind -o remount,ro.
> > Sending the flags to that hook would probably be a good idea in addition
> > to this patch, but I haven't done it here.
>
> NAK. This is just plain wrong - what about the filesystems that are not
> bdev-backed or, as e.g. btrfs, sit on more than one device?
>
> <comments about inadequacy of cgroup as an API censored - far too unprintable>
Drat.
Would passing the mount flags from do_remount() to security_sb_remount()
be acceptable? Then at least the LSM could distinguish and act
accordingly.
Thanks for looking.
-serge
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-11 3:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-11 3:19 prevent containers from turning host filesystem readonly Serge Hallyn
2012-02-11 3:37 ` Al Viro
2012-02-11 3:57 ` Serge Hallyn [this message]
2012-02-11 4:07 ` Serge Hallyn
2012-02-11 19:07 ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-02-11 20:28 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2012-02-12 4:27 ` 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=20120211035705.GA5563@sergelap \
--to=serge.hallyn@canonical.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=apw@canonical.com \
--cc=containers@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@free.fr \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stgraber@ubuntu.com \
--cc=viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
/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