[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5e6b80da-8185-22f3-ff8c-b976ad743f5d@nmatt.com>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 17:54:38 -0400
From: Matt Brown <matt@...tt.com>
To: Peter Dolding <oiaohm@...il.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, "Serge E. Hallyn"
<serge@...lyn.com>, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
"kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com" <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>,
linux-security-module <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/2] security: tty: make TIOCSTI ioctl require
CAP_SYS_ADMIN
On 05/16/2017 05:43 PM, Peter Dolding wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 12:28 AM, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 5:22 AM, Matt Brown <matt@...tt.com> wrote:
>>> On 05/16/2017 05:01 AM, Peter Dolding wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I could see a case being make for CAP_SYS_TTY_CONFIG. However I still
>>>>> choose to do with CAP_SYS_ADMIN because it is already in use in the
>>>>> TIOCSTI ioctl.
>>>>>
>>>> Matt Brown don't give me existing behaviour. CAP_SYS_ADMIN is
>>>> overload. The documentation tells you that you are not to expand it
>>>> and you openly admit you have.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is not true that I'm openly going against what the documentation
>>> instructs. The part of the email chain where I show this got removed
>>> somehow. Again I will refer to the capabilities man page that you
>>> quoted.
>>>
>>> From http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/capabilities.7.html
>>>
>>> "Don't choose CAP_SYS_ADMIN if you can possibly avoid it!
>>> ...
>>> The only new features that should be associated with CAP_SYS_ADMIN are
>>> ones that closely match existing uses in that silo."
>>>
>>> My feature affects the TIOCSTI ioctl. The TIOCSTI ioctl already falls
>>> under CAP_SYS_ADMIN, therefore I actually *am* following the
>>> documentation.
>>
>> CAP_SYS_ADMIN is the right choice here, I agree with Matt: it is
>> already in use for TIOCSTI. We can't trivially add new capabilities
>> flags (see the various giant threads debating this, the most recently
>> that I remember from the kernel lock-down series related to Secure
>> Boot).
>
> We cannot just keep on expanding CAP_SYS_ADMIN either.
>>
>>>> I fact this usage of TIOCSTI I personally think should require two
>>>> capabilities flags set. CAP_SYS_ADMIN section left as it is at this
>>>> stage. With TIOSCTI stuck behind another capability.
>>>>
>>>> If you had added a new capability flag you could set file capabilities
>>>> on any of the old applications depending on the now secured behaviour.
>>
>> If we're adjusting applications, they should be made to avoid TIOSCTI
>> completely. This looks to me a lot like the symlink restrictions: yes,
>> userspace should be fixed to the do the right thing, but why not
>> provide support to userspace to avoid the problem entirely?
>>
> Kees I like but you have forgot the all important rule. The Linus
> Rule. Existing applications must have a method work.
> So modify applications binary is not way out of problem.
>
> Please note making CAP_SYS_ADMIN the only way to use TIOCSTI also
> means setting CAP_SYS_ADMIN on all the existing applications to obey
> the Linus Rule of not break userspace. So this is why the patch is
> strictly no as this means elevating privilege of existing applications
> and possibly opening up more security flaws.
This feature is not required so it is not "making CAP_SYS_ADMIN the
only way to use TIOCSTI". It defaults to no as to not break some
existing programs that use it.
>
> Reality any patch like the one we are talking about due to the Linus
> Rule and the security risk it will open up obey this it just be
> rejected. There is another kind of way I will cover with Serge.
>
> Peter Dolding.
>
Matt
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
