From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Eric Biggers <ebiggers3@gmail.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 for 3.18/4.1] KEYS: add missing permission check for request_key() destination
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2017 13:06:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171218120655.GC31295@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171215204418.130486-2-ebiggers3@gmail.com>
On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 12:44:18PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
>
> commit 4dca6ea1d9432052afb06baf2e3ae78188a4410b upstream.
> [Please apply to 3.18-stable and 4.1-stable.]
>
> When the request_key() syscall is not passed a destination keyring, it
> links the requested key (if constructed) into the "default" request-key
> keyring. This should require Write permission to the keyring. However,
> there is actually no permission check.
>
> This can be abused to add keys to any keyring to which only Search
> permission is granted. This is because Search permission allows joining
> the keyring. keyctl_set_reqkey_keyring(KEY_REQKEY_DEFL_SESSION_KEYRING)
> then will set the default request-key keyring to the session keyring.
> Then, request_key() can be used to add keys to the keyring.
>
> Both negatively and positively instantiated keys can be added using this
> method. Adding negative keys is trivial. Adding a positive key is a
> bit trickier. It requires that either /sbin/request-key positively
> instantiates the key, or that another thread adds the key to the process
> keyring at just the right time, such that request_key() misses it
> initially but then finds it in construct_alloc_key().
>
> Fix this bug by checking for Write permission to the keyring in
> construct_get_dest_keyring() when the default keyring is being used.
>
> We don't do the permission check for non-default keyrings because that
> was already done by the earlier call to lookup_user_key(). Also,
> request_key_and_link() is currently passed a 'struct key *' rather than
> a key_ref_t, so the "possessed" bit is unavailable.
>
> We also don't do the permission check for the "requestor keyring", to
> continue to support the use case described by commit 8bbf4976b59f
> ("KEYS: Alter use of key instantiation link-to-keyring argument") where
> /sbin/request-key recursively calls request_key() to add keys to the
> original requestor's destination keyring. (I don't know of any users
> who actually do that, though...)
>
> Fixes: 3e30148c3d52 ("[PATCH] Keys: Make request-key create an authorisation key")
> Signed-off-by: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
> ---
> security/keys/request_key.c | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
Thanks for the patch, but this was already in the 3.18.88 release.
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-18 12:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-15 20:44 [PATCH 1/2 for 3.18/4.1] KEYS: Don't permit request_key() to construct a new keyring Eric Biggers
2017-12-15 20:44 ` [PATCH 2/2 for 3.18/4.1] KEYS: add missing permission check for request_key() destination Eric Biggers
2017-12-18 12:06 ` Greg KH [this message]
2017-12-18 12:07 ` [PATCH 1/2 for 3.18/4.1] KEYS: Don't permit request_key() to construct a new keyring Greg KH
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=20171218120655.GC31295@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiggers3@gmail.com \
--cc=ebiggers@google.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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).