On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 15:03:33 +0000
"Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ptrace is allowed to tasks in the same user namespace according to
> the usual rules (i.e. the same rules as for two tasks in the init
> user namespace). ptrace is also allowed to a user namespace to
> which the current task the has CAP_SYS_PTRACE capability.
>
>
> ...
>
> --- a/include/linux/capability.h
> +++ b/include/linux/capability.h
> @@ -546,6 +546,8 @@ extern const kernel_cap_t __cap_init_eff_set;
> */
> #define has_capability(t, cap) (security_real_capable((t), &init_user_ns, (cap)) == 0)
>
> +#define has_ns_capability(t, ns, cap) (security_real_capable((t), (ns), (cap)) == 0)
macroitis.
> /**
> * has_capability_noaudit - Determine if a task has a superior capability available (unaudited)
> * @t: The task in question
> diff --git a/include/linux/user_namespace.h b/include/linux/user_namespace.h
> index faf4679..862fc59 100644
> --- a/include/linux/user_namespace.h
> +++ b/include/linux/user_namespace.h
> @@ -39,6 +39,9 @@ static inline void put_user_ns(struct user_namespace *ns)
> uid_t user_ns_map_uid(struct user_namespace *to, const struct cred *cred, uid_t uid);
> gid_t user_ns_map_gid(struct user_namespace *to, const struct cred *cred, gid_t gid);
>
> +int same_or_ancestor_user_ns(struct task_struct *task,
> + struct task_struct *victim);
bool.
> #else
>
> static inline struct user_namespace *get_user_ns(struct user_namespace *ns)
>
> ...
>
> --- a/kernel/user_namespace.c
> +++ b/kernel/user_namespace.c
> @@ -129,6 +129,22 @@ gid_t user_ns_map_gid(struct user_namespace *to, const struct cred *cred, gid_t
> return overflowgid;
> }
>
> +int same_or_ancestor_user_ns(struct task_struct *task,
> + struct task_struct *victim)
> +{
> + struct user_namespace *u1 = task_cred_xxx(task, user)->user_ns;
> + struct user_namespace *u2 = task_cred_xxx(victim, user)->user_ns;
> + for (;;) {
> + if (u1 == u2)
> + return 1;
> + if (u1 == &init_user_ns)
> + return 0;
> + u1 = u1->creator->user_ns;
> + }
> + /* We never get here */
> + return 0;
Remove?
> +}
> +
> static __init int user_namespaces_init(void)
> {
> user_ns_cachep = KMEM_CACHE(user_namespace, SLAB_PANIC);
>
> ...
>
> int cap_ptrace_access_check(struct task_struct *child, unsigned int mode)
> {
> int ret = 0;
> + const struct cred *cred, *tcred;
>
> rcu_read_lock();
> - if (!cap_issubset(__task_cred(child)->cap_permitted,
> - current_cred()->cap_permitted) &&
> - !capable(CAP_SYS_PTRACE))
> - ret = -EPERM;
> + cred = current_cred();
> + tcred = __task_cred(child);
> + /*
> + * The ancestor user_ns check may be gratuitous, as I think
> + * we've already guaranteed that in kernel/ptrace.c.
> + */
?
> + if (same_or_ancestor_user_ns(current, child) &&
> + cap_issubset(tcred->cap_permitted, cred->cap_permitted))
> + goto out;
> + if (ns_capable(tcred->user->user_ns, CAP_SYS_PTRACE))
> + goto out;
> + ret = -EPERM;
> +out:
> rcu_read_unlock();
> return ret;
> }
>
> ...
>
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
