public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vasily Kulikov <segoon@openwall.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@google.com>,
	Brad Spengler <spender@grsecurity.net>,
	Linux Containers <containers@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	PaX Team <pageexec@freemail.hu>, Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] fs: Limit sys_mount to only request filesystem modules.
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 21:36:11 +0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130304173611.GA8500@cachalot> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <878v63mwm3.fsf_-_@xmission.com>

(cc'ed kernel-hardening)

On Sun, Mar 03, 2013 at 23:51 -0800, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Modify the request_module to prefix the file system type with "fs-"
> and add aliases to all of the filesystems that can be built as modules
> to match.
> 
> A common practice is to build all of the kernel code and leave code
> that is not commonly needed as modules, with the result that many
> users are exposed to any bug anywhere in the kernel.
> 
> Looking for filesystems with a fs- prefix limits the pool of possible
> modules that can be loaded by mount to just filesystems trivially
> making things safer with no real cost.
> 
> Using aliases means user space can control the policy of which
> filesystem modules are auto-loaded by editing /etc/modprobe.d/*.conf
> with blacklist and alias directives.  Allowing simple, safe,
> well understood work-arounds to known problematic software.
> 
> This also addresses a rare but unfortunate problem where the filesystem
> name is not the same as it's module name and module auto-loading
> would not work.  While writing this patch I saw a handful of such
> cases.  The most significant being autofs that lives in the module
> autofs4.
> 
> This is relevant to user namespaces because we can reach the request
> module in get_fs_type() without having any special permissions, and
> people get uncomfortable when a user specified string (in this case
> the filesystem type) goes all of the way to request_module.
> 
> After having looked at this issue I don't think there is any
> particular reason to perform any filtering or permission checks beyond
> making it clear in the module request that we want a filesystem
> module.  The common pattern in the kernel is to call request_module()
> without regards to the users permissions.  In general all a filesystem
> module does once loaded is call register_filesystem() and go to sleep.
> Which means there is not much attack surface exposed by loading a
> filesytem module unless the filesystem is mounted.  In a user
> namespace filesystems are not mounted unless .fs_flags = FS_USERNS_MOUNT,
> which most filesystems do not set today.
> 
> Acked-by: Serge Hallyn <serge.hallyn@canonical.com>
> Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> Reported-by: Kees Cook <keescook@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
...
> diff --git a/fs/filesystems.c b/fs/filesystems.c
> index da165f6..92567d9 100644
> --- a/fs/filesystems.c
> +++ b/fs/filesystems.c
> @@ -273,7 +273,7 @@ struct file_system_type *get_fs_type(const char *name)
>  	int len = dot ? dot - name : strlen(name);
>  
>  	fs = __get_fs_type(name, len);
> -	if (!fs && (request_module("%.*s", len, name) == 0))
> +	if (!fs && (request_module("fs-%.*s", len, name) == 0))
>  		fs = __get_fs_type(name, len);
>  
>  	if (dot && fs && !(fs->fs_flags & FS_HAS_SUBTYPE)) {

Maybe we should divide request_module() into several functions regarding
expected caller's privileges?

- request_module() for CAP_SYS_MODULE in init_ns
- request_module_relaxed() for everybody

request_module_relaxed() is used in get_fs_type(), dev_load() and all
places where the safety of module loading is manually checked.  All old
not yet checked users of request_module() will not be triggerable from user_ns.
That's the same scheme as with capable() and ns_capable().

Thanks,

-- 
Vasily Kulikov
http://www.openwall.com - bringing security into open computing environments

  reply	other threads:[~2013-03-04 17:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-03-02  1:22 user ns: arbitrary module loading Kees Cook
2013-03-03  0:57 ` Serge E. Hallyn
2013-03-03  1:18   ` Kees Cook
2013-03-03  3:56     ` Serge E. Hallyn
2013-03-03 10:14       ` [RFC][PATCH] fs: Limit sys_mount to only loading filesystem modules Eric W. Biederman
2013-03-03 15:29         ` Serge E. Hallyn
2013-03-03 18:30         ` Kees Cook
2013-03-03 17:48       ` user ns: arbitrary module loading Kees Cook
2013-03-04  8:29         ` Mathias Krause
2013-03-04 16:46           ` Kees Cook
2013-03-04 18:21             ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-03-04 18:41               ` Kees Cook
2013-03-03  4:12   ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-03-03 18:18     ` Kees Cook
2013-03-03 21:58       ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-03-04  2:35         ` Kees Cook
2013-03-04  3:54           ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-03-04  7:48           ` [PATCH 0/2] userns bug fixes for v3.9-rc2 for review Eric W. Biederman
2013-03-04  7:50             ` [PATCH 1/2] userns: Stop oopsing in key_change_session_keyring Eric W. Biederman
2013-03-04  7:51             ` [PATCH 2/2] fs: Limit sys_mount to only request filesystem modules Eric W. Biederman
2013-03-04 17:36               ` Vasily Kulikov [this message]
2013-03-04 18:36                 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-03-05 19:06               ` Kay Sievers
2013-03-05 19:32                 ` Kees Cook
2013-03-05 23:24                 ` 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=20130304173611.GA8500@cachalot \
    --to=segoon@openwall.com \
    --cc=containers@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=davej@redhat.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=keescook@google.com \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pageexec@freemail.hu \
    --cc=spender@grsecurity.net \
    --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