Re: [PATCH v2] xattr: Enable security.capability in user namespaces

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

 



On 07/12/2017 01:53 PM, Vivek Goyal wrote:
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:05:11AM -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:

[..]
@@ -301,14 +721,39 @@ ssize_t
  __vfs_getxattr(struct dentry *dentry, struct inode *inode, const char *name,
  	       void *value, size_t size)
  {
-	const struct xattr_handler *handler;
+	const struct xattr_handler *handler = NULL;
+	char *newname =  NULL;
+	int ret, userns_supt_xattr;
+	struct user_namespace *userns = current_user_ns();
+
+	userns_supt_xattr = (xattr_is_userns_supported(name, false) >= 0);
+
Hi Stephan,

+	do {
+		kfree(newname);
+
+		newname = xattr_userns_name(name, userns);
					    ^^^
Will name be pointing to a freed string in second iteration of loop.

Fixing for v3.


+		if (IS_ERR(newname))
+			return PTR_ERR(newname);
+
+		if (!handler) {
+			name = newname;
Here we assign name and at the beginning of second iteration we free
newname.

Also I am not sure why do we do this assignment only if handler is NULL.

The handler shouldn't change but this optimization isn't helpful. Fixed through this patch:

https://github.com/stefanberger/linux/commit/10828401b29a13f8c56f8fad0c0fb2690e4af878



BTW, I set cap_sys_admin on a file outside usernamespace and then launched
user namespace (mapping 1000 to 0). And then tried to do getcap on file
and I am not seeing security.capability set by host. Not sure what am I
doing wrong. getxattr() seems to return -ENODATA. Still debugging it.

This was a regression due to the bug in the loop. I didn't have a test case (with runc) for it, now I do.


Also, have we resovled the question of stacked filesystem like overlayfs.
There we are switching creds to mounter's creds when doing operations on
underlying filesystem. I am concenrned does that mean, we will get and
return security.capability to caller in usernamespace instead of
security.capability@uid=1000.

I would have to test this, otherwise I don't know. I'll try it out with Docker.

   Stefan


Vivek

+			handler = xattr_resolve_name(inode, &name);
+			if (IS_ERR(handler)) {
+				ret = PTR_ERR(handler);
+				goto out;
+			}
+			if (!handler->get) {
+				ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
+				goto out;
+			}
+		}
+		ret = handler->get(handler, dentry, inode, name, value, size);
+		userns = userns->parent;
+	} while ((ret == -ENODATA) && userns && userns_supt_xattr);
- handler = xattr_resolve_name(inode, &name);
-	if (IS_ERR(handler))
-		return PTR_ERR(handler);
-	if (!handler->get)
-		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
-	return handler->get(handler, dentry, inode, name, value, size);
+out:
+	kfree(newname);
+	return ret;
  }
  EXPORT_SYMBOL(__vfs_getxattr);
Thanks
Vivek


_______________________________________________
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