From: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
To: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Cc: "Kuniyuki Iwashima" <kuniyu@amazon.com>,
"Martin KaFai Lau" <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
"Daniel Borkmann" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
"John Fastabend" <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
"Alexei Starovoitov" <ast@kernel.org>,
"Andrii Nakryiko" <andrii@kernel.org>,
"Eduard Zingerman" <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
"Song Liu" <song@kernel.org>,
"Yonghong Song" <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
"KP Singh" <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
"Stanislav Fomichev" <sdf@fomichev.me>,
"Hao Luo" <haoluo@google.com>, "Jiri Olsa" <jolsa@kernel.org>,
"Mickaël Salaün" <mic@digikod.net>,
"Günther Noack" <gnoack@google.com>,
"Paul Moore" <paul@paul-moore.com>,
"James Morris" <jmorris@namei.org>,
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
"Stephen Smalley" <stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com>,
"Ondrej Mosnacek" <omosnace@redhat.com>,
"Casey Schaufler" <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
"Kuniyuki Iwashima" <kuni1840@gmail.com>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, selinux@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 bpf-next 0/5] af_unix: Allow BPF LSM to scrub SCM_RIGHTS at sendmsg().
Date: Tue, 6 May 2025 11:15:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250506-eitel-gerede-7c8b5e556a2c@brauner> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAP01T77STmncrPt=BsFfEY6SX1+oYNXhPeZ1HC9J=S2jhOwQoQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, May 06, 2025 at 12:49:11AM +0200, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> On Mon, 5 May 2025 at 23:58, Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.com> wrote:
> >
> > As long as recvmsg() or recvmmsg() is used with cmsg, it is not
> > possible to avoid receiving file descriptors via SCM_RIGHTS.
> >
> > This behaviour has occasionally been flagged as problematic.
> >
> > For instance, as noted on the uAPI Group page [0], an untrusted peer
> > could send a file descriptor pointing to a hung NFS mount and then
> > close it. Once the receiver calls recvmsg() with msg_control, the
> > descriptor is automatically installed, and then the responsibility
> > for the final close() now falls on the receiver, which may result
> > in blocking the process for a long time.
> >
> > systemd calls cmsg_close_all() [1] after each recvmsg() to close()
> > unwanted file descriptors sent via SCM_RIGHTS.
> >
> > However, this cannot work around the issue because the last fput()
> > could occur on the receiver side once sendmsg() with SCM_RIGHTS
> > succeeds. Also, even filtering by LSM at recvmsg() does not work
> > for the same reason.
> >
> > Thus, we need a better way to filter SCM_RIGHTS on the sender side.
> >
> > This series allows BPF LSM to inspect skb at sendmsg() and scrub
> > SCM_RIGHTS fds by kfunc.
> >
> > Link: https://uapi-group.org/kernel-features/#disabling-reception-of-scm_rights-for-af_unix-sockets #[0]
> > Link: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/v257.5/src/basic/fd-util.c#L612-L628 #[1]
> >
>
> This sounds pretty useful!
>
> I think you should mention the cases of possible DoS on close() or
> flooding, e.g. with FUSE controlled fd/NFS hangs in the commit log
> itself.
> I think it's been an open problem for a while now with no good solution.
> Currently systemd's FDSTORE=1 for PID 1 is susceptible to the same
> problem, even if the underlying service isn't root.
>
> I think it is also useful for restricting what individual file
> descriptors can be passed around by a process.
> Say restricting usage of an fd to a process and its children, but not
> allowing it to be shared with others.
> Send side hook is the right point to enforce it.
>
> Therefore exercising scm_fp_list would be a good idea.
No, that's a terrible idea. If the receiver expects 10 file descriptors
and suddenly some magically disappear or the order gets messed up that's
terrible for security. It's either close all or nothing.
> We should provide some more examples of the filtering policy in the selftests.
> Maybe a simple example, e.g. only memfd or a pipe fd can be passed,
> and nothing else.
> It would require checking file->f_ops.
There's not going to be poking around in file->f_ops for this.
Really, what I asked for was a simple way to set a socket option without
any bpf or lsm involvement so even really dumb userspace can simply
block receiving any file descriptors. How that spiraled into "let's
apply arbitrary filters on SCM_RIGHTS and make files disappear on the
way" is beyond me.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-06 9:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-05 21:56 [PATCH v1 bpf-next 0/5] af_unix: Allow BPF LSM to scrub SCM_RIGHTS at sendmsg() Kuniyuki Iwashima
2025-05-05 21:56 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 1/5] af_unix: Call security_unix_may_send() in sendmsg() for all socket types Kuniyuki Iwashima
2025-05-05 21:56 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 2/5] af_unix: Pass skb to security_unix_may_send() Kuniyuki Iwashima
2025-05-05 21:56 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 3/5] af_unix: Remove redundant scm->fp check in __scm_destroy() Kuniyuki Iwashima
2025-05-09 14:13 ` kernel test robot
2025-05-05 21:56 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 4/5] bpf: Add kfunc to scrub SCM_RIGHTS at security_unix_may_send() Kuniyuki Iwashima
2025-05-06 0:13 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-05-06 8:25 ` Mickaël Salaün
2025-05-09 15:06 ` kernel test robot
2025-05-05 21:56 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 5/5] selftest: bpf: Add test for bpf_unix_scrub_fds() Kuniyuki Iwashima
2025-05-05 22:49 ` [PATCH v1 bpf-next 0/5] af_unix: Allow BPF LSM to scrub SCM_RIGHTS at sendmsg() Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-05-06 0:21 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
2025-05-06 16:25 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-05-06 18:16 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
2025-05-06 9:15 ` Christian Brauner [this message]
2025-05-06 16:08 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-05-06 18:14 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
2025-05-05 23:21 ` Paul Moore
2025-05-06 0:35 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
2025-05-06 14:57 ` Paul Moore
2025-05-06 12:17 ` Lennart Poettering
2025-05-06 18:19 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
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=20250506-eitel-gerede-7c8b5e556a2c@brauner \
--to=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=gnoack@google.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=kuni1840@gmail.com \
--cc=kuniyu@amazon.com \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=mic@digikod.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=omosnace@redhat.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=selinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).