Re: [PATCH v2012.1] fs: symlink restrictions on sticky directories

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

 



* Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> @@ -1495,6 +1496,15 @@ static struct ctl_table fs_table[] = {
>  #endif
>  #endif
>  	{
> +		.procname	= "protected_sticky_symlinks",
> +		.data		= &protected_sticky_symlinks,
> +		.maxlen		= sizeof(int),
> +		.mode		= 0644,
> +		.proc_handler	= proc_dointvec_minmax,
> +		.extra1		= &zero,
> +		.extra2		= &one,
> +	},

Small detail:

Might make sense to change the .mode to 0600, to make it harder 
for unprivileged attack code to guess whether this protection 
(and the resulting audit warning to the administrator) is 
enabled on a system or not.

It can be probed, but only at the cost of generating a warning.

Likewise, distros should set /etc/sysctl.conf to 0600 as well, 
for similar reasons.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux