On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 04:37:21PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
>> + is_chrooted = (fs->root.mnt->mnt_mountpoint !=
>> + fs->root.mnt->mnt_parent->mnt_root ||
>> + fs->root.dentry != fs->root.mnt->mnt_root);
>
> Folks, is it _that_ hard to at least try to compile your patches? Hint:
> this one will *not*. That sad detail aside, this test would have been
> a pile of garbage even on the kernels that used to have mnt_mountpoint
> in struct vfsmount. What *are* you trying to test here? The last part
> at least does make some sense - it's "process root happens to be the
> root of some vfsmount". The first part, though, makes no sense whatsoever;
> it's "... and that vfsmount is mounted on top of root of some other
> vfsmount".
I compiled it, booted it, and tested it. I based it off an oldish
kernel, though, so I can rebase.
The first approach I tried was (from memory -- may not compile at all
on any version) fs->root.mnt != fs->root.mnt->mnt_parent. That didn't
work. The issue is that on dracut-based distros, AFAICT, the root (in
the sense of the root of the tree of struct vfsmounts) is rootfs. The
apparent root (the filesystem containing /, /usr, etc) is mounted on
top of (rootfs)/. Dracut then does something with the effect of
chroot("/"). So you end up with the vfsmount that contains "/" not
being the actual root vfsmount. But there's nothing hidden by the
chroot -- even if fs->root.mnt pointed at rootfs, "/" would still
follow the mountpoint into the actual filesystem.
An different approach would be to have fs_struct keep track of a hard
and a soft root. chroot would stay CAP_SYS_ADMIN only and change both
roots. A new unprivileged_chroot would change only the soft root.
follow_dotdot would check both, so unprivileged_chroot wouldn't be
useful for breaking chroot. The big downside would be an extra branch
on every follow_dotdot.
--Andy
--
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
