From: stsp <stsp2@yandex.ru>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>,
Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@redhat.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
network dev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Security Module list
<linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
SElinux list <selinux@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Possible mistake in commit 3ca459eaba1b ("tun: fix group permission check")
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 17:58:13 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e4a8a2f6-c581-46c9-98f3-16e8c68b4107@yandex.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <67979d24d21bc_3f1a29434@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch>
27.01.2025 17:50, Willem de Bruijn пишет:
> Thanks for the report Ondrej.
>
> Agreed that we need to reinstate this. I suggest this explicit
> extra branch after the more likely cases:
>
> @@ -585,6 +585,9 @@ static inline bool tun_capable(struct tun_struct *tun)
> return 1;
> if (gid_valid(tun->group) && in_egroup_p(tun->group))
> return 1;
> + if (!uid_valid(tun->owner) && !gid_valid(tun->group))
> + return 1;
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
> The intent clearly has always been to allow access if owner and group
> are not explicitly set.
Perfectly fine with me.
I'd raise the question about
the security implications, but
definitely not within this
regression subject.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-27 15:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-27 9:10 Possible mistake in commit 3ca459eaba1b ("tun: fix group permission check") Ondrej Mosnacek
2025-01-27 10:00 ` stsp
2025-01-27 14:50 ` Willem de Bruijn
2025-01-27 14:58 ` stsp [this message]
2025-01-28 14:20 ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2025-01-28 14:45 ` stsp
2025-01-28 14:58 ` stsp
2025-01-28 15:04 ` Willem de Bruijn
2025-01-28 17:49 ` stsp
2025-01-28 22:59 ` Willem de Bruijn
2025-01-29 6:59 ` stsp
2025-01-29 14:12 ` Willem de Bruijn
2025-01-29 14:27 ` stsp
2025-01-30 16:46 ` Willem de Bruijn
2025-02-04 0:29 ` Paul Moore
2025-02-04 16:18 ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2025-02-04 19:40 ` Paul Moore
2025-02-06 3:04 ` Willem de Bruijn
2025-01-29 14:19 ` Willem de Bruijn
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=e4a8a2f6-c581-46c9-98f3-16e8c68b4107@yandex.ru \
--to=stsp2@yandex.ru \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=omosnace@redhat.com \
--cc=selinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=willemb@google.com \
--cc=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.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