On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 11:52:42AM +0100, Mickaël Salaün wrote: > [...] > This change may not impact systems relying on other permission models > than POSIX capabilities (e.g. Tomoyo). Being able to use chroot(2) on > such systems may require to update their security policies. > > Only the chroot system call is relaxed with this no_new_privs check; the > init_chroot() helper doesn't require such change. > > Allowing unprivileged users to use chroot(2) is one of the initial > objectives of no_new_privs: > https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/userspace-api/no_new_privs.html > This patch is a follow-up of a previous one sent by Andy Lutomirski: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/0e2f0f54e19bff53a3739ecfddb4ffa9a6dbde4d.1327858005.git.luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ I liked it back when Andy first suggested it, and I still like it now. :) I'm curious, do you have a specific user in mind for this feature? > [...] > @@ -546,8 +547,18 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE1(chroot, const char __user *, filename) > if (error) > goto dput_and_out; > > + /* > + * Changing the root directory for the calling task (and its future > + * children) requires that this task has CAP_SYS_CHROOT in its > + * namespace, or be running with no_new_privs and not sharing its > + * fs_struct and not escaping its current root (cf. create_user_ns()). > + * As for seccomp, checking no_new_privs avoids scenarios where > + * unprivileged tasks can affect the behavior of privileged children. > + */ > error = -EPERM; > - if (!ns_capable(current_user_ns(), CAP_SYS_CHROOT)) > + if (!ns_capable(current_user_ns(), CAP_SYS_CHROOT) && > + !(task_no_new_privs(current) && current->fs->users == 1 > + && !current_chrooted())) > goto dput_and_out; > error = security_path_chroot(&path); > if (error) I think the logic here needs to be rearranged to avoid setting PF_SUPERPRIV, and I find the many negations hard to read. Perhaps: static inline int current_chroot_allowed(void) { /* comment here */ if (task_no_new_privs(current) && current->fs->users == 1 && !current_chrooted()) return 0; if (ns_capable(current_user_ns(), CAP_SYS_CHROOT)) return 0; return -EPERM; } ... error = current_chroot_allowed(); if (error) goto dput_and_out; I can't think of a way to race current->fs->users ... -- Kees Cook