Re: [CFT][PATCH 7/8] userns: Add a knob to disable setgroups on a per user namespace basis

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 4:04 PM, Eric W.Biederman <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On December 9, 2014 4:28:38 PM CST, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Eric W. Biederman
>>><ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> - Expose the knob to user space through a proc file
>>>/proc/<pid>/setgroups
>>>>
>>>>   A value of "deny" means the setgroups system call is disabled in
>>>the
>>>>   current processes user namespace and can not be enabled in the
>>>>   future in this user namespace.
>>>>
>>>>   A value of "allow" means the segtoups system call is enabled.
>>>>
>>>> - Descendant user namespaces inherit the value of setgroups from
>>>>   their parents.
>>>>
>>>> - A proc file is used (instead of a sysctl) as sysctls
>>>>   currently do not pass in a struct file so file_ns_capable
>>>>   is unusable.
>>>
>>>Reviewed-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>>But I still don't like the name "setgroups".  People may look at that
>>>and have no clue what the scope of the setting is.  And anyone who, as
>>>root, writes "deny" to /proc/self/setgroups, thinking that it acts on
>>>self, will be in for a surprise.
>>
>> True setgroups isn't perfect.  Documenting it in a manpage may have to be enough. The only real improvement I can think of would be to make the setting a sysctl.   But I think pursuing that approaches the point where perfection is the enemy of getting this problem fixed.
>>
>
> Would "userns_setgroups" be okay?

Maybe.

I just played with this and this is a much bigger booby trap than I had
realized.  Disabling setgroups disables the possibility of logging in the
future and since it is a one way switch the only way out is to reboot.

Hooray our software checks the returns of setgroups.  Booh.  This is a
really nasty knob to have anywhere.

I need to think about this a little bit.  Giving root the power to shoot
himself in the foot is one thing.  Giving root a loaded gun pointed at
his foot with the hammer pulled back, and a sign that says I dare you to
pull the trigger, seems like a bad idea.

I think I need to reduce when that knob can be used.  Grr.
Back to the drawing board!

Eric
_______________________________________________
Containers mailing list
Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers




[Index of Archives]     [Cgroups]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux